BR 

5«b 

>W43 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS: 



WESTMINSTER CONFESSION 



CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES 



TESTED BY THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 



Happy is that people whose God is the Lord." — Psalm cxliv. 15. 



BY C. WEBSTER, 

Pastor of the First Associate Presbyterian Congregation, Philadelphia. 



PHILADELPHIA: 
WILLIAM S. YOUNG,— 173 RACE STREET. 

1845. 



' 






O \P< 



V 



% 



PREFACE. 



The following pages contain the substance of a discourse 
delivered to the people of the author's charge on the evening 
of November 14th, 1844; the notes and most of the authorities 
have been added since the discourse was delivered. The author 
is not to be understood as adopting the sentiments of the au- 
thorities quoted any farther than they are expressed in the 
quotations themselves. He has laboured rather to be perspicu- 
ous than ornamental. He has written in the hope of being 
useful to plain unsophisticated Christians. 

The author has four inducements for offering this discourse 
to the public: First, the request of many who heard it. Second, 
he coi^dently believes that a general regard to the principles 
it advocates is no less essential to the well being of the church, 
than to the country. Third, he is desirous of adding his testi- 
mony, however feeble it may be, to principles believed essen- 
tial to the temporal and spiritual prosperity of his native land. 
Fourth, the questions agitated are at present occupying a good 
share of public attention, as is evident from their discussion 
by the periodicals of the day. If this production should be 
judged worthy of notice, by any person who may entertain 
views differing from those here advanced, it is hoped they 
will level their artillery not against the writer, nor the defects 
of his performance, but that they will demonstrate his facts to 
be unfounded and his reasoning fallacious. 

It is confidently believed, so far as different views prevail in 
the church respecting the constitution of the United States, 
that difference relates to points which are not terms of com- 
munion among us; consequently, these points are legitimate 
subjects of free discussion, if that discussion be conducted in a 
proper spirit and manner. The author requests the reader not 
to infer from his condemnation of certain principles, any re- 
proach of those who may hold and preach them, unless they 
do so against light which they have, or might have, but wil- 
fully reject. 



IV PREFACE. 

So long as church courts leave their members free to vote or 
not, as they may think proper, the discussion of the question of 
allegiance to the constitution should produce no alienation of 
brotherly love. It belongs to those who cannot vote, to bear 
with their brethren who can, or secede. Those who do vote 
have no right to take offence at such as do not, so long as their 
own liberty remains untouched. Yet, there is a disposition in 
many of the voters to persecute non-voters, which is wrong, 
and a sad evidence of a bad cause. 

Thomas Paine published a book containing many good and 
many bad things, entitled "Rights of Man." This book, not- 
withstanding all its good, was entirely consistent with the 
same author's "Age of Reason." All his theories rejected the 
rights of God as repugnant to the rights of man. He assumed 
that the rights of the Creator could not harmonize with the 
rights of his creatures. France reduced Paine's theory to prac- 
tice. The world know the result. In our own land the attempt 
is made, not so much directly to reject altogether the rights of 
God, as to effect a total separation between his rights and the 
rights of his creatures. The creature has certain supposed 
unalienable rights independent of the Creator. These must be 
maintained. God has also some rights, which may be main- 
tained, so far as they do not interfere with this supposed 
independence of the creature. Whether we, as a nation, 
are destined to meet with any better success than that which 
attended the experiment of France, a little time will demon- 
strate. But the author of these pages believing that human 
and divine rights are as indissoluble and consistent with each 
other as the relation of creature and Creator, has chosen for 
the title of his unpretending book, — divine and human 
rights. C. W. 

Philadelphia, 1845. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN EIGHTS. 



It is generally conceded that the gospel ministry is degraded 
by meddling with the mere party conflicts of the times. But 
the science of civil government embraces moral principles im- 
mutable in their nature, and of paramount obligation. A 
knowledge of these principles being necessary for the welfare 
of communities, they must be legitimate subjects of sober pul- 
pit discussion. For who, that has the common properties and 
feelings of our nature, can regard without interest both the glory 
and the shame of his native land? The love of country is 
firmly seated in the human breast. No distance, no lapse of 
time can wholly eradicate this feeling of the heart. In adversi- 
ty, in exile, in captivity, in far distant and barbarous climes, the 
mind involuntarily wanders back in its musings to the familiar 
and cherished objects of childhood, while imagination arrays 
these retrospective visions in robes of surpassing beauty and 
excellence. " If 1 forget thee, Jerusalem, let my right hand 
forget her cunning. If 1 do not remember thee, let my tongue 
cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I prefer not Jerusalem above 
my chief joy. 3 ' 

Love of country, then, is in all a natural affection, and in 
some a Christian virtue. But the degree of a Christian's affection 
for the government of his country, and the nature and extent 
of his obedience to her laws, should be regulated by the moral 
character of that government, and those laws; for the simple 
reason that he is also the subject of a higher power, whose go- 
vernment and laws are not only supreme, but also perfect and 
divine. His affections, his interests, and his enjoyments, are 
concentrated in a kingdom, which, though not of this world, is 
of right, and will soon be in fact, universal. Its government 
claims dominion over the mightiest monarchies of the earth. 
Its supremacy is already acknowledged by Christians, who hold 

1* 



6 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

its laws paramount to all human obligations; and the rapid flight 
of time will soon usher in the day, when these laws shall be 
obeyed by the inhabitants of all lands. The question, then, is 
the government of our country in harmony with this superior 
authority? or, in other words, is the government of the United 
States such, that Christians may with a good conscience yield 
a voluntary obedience to all its requirements, and swear in the 
name of the living God, as they shall give account to him in 
the great day, to give it an active support? can neither be unin- 
teresting nor unimportant: for if they cannot do this without 
rebellion against God, by doing it, they certainly expose them- 
selves to the divine anger.* So, on the other hand, if they can 
do this without the violation of any divine law, by refusing, 
they also expose themselves to wrath. " For the powers that 
be are ordained of God, and they that resist shall receive to 
themselves damnation." Consequently, it seems necessary that 

* Christians must indeed be subject to the laws of the land for wrath's sake, 
in a passive way. That is, they must make no active forcible resistance; 
unless either the magistrate require them to do some act of a moral character 
which God has prohibited, or require them to neglect some such act which 
he has required; or unless they have the majority or physical power sufficient 
to throw off the yoke of bondage in the use of lawful means. There is no 
doubt in my mind respecting the application of Rom. xiii. Titus iii. 1, and 
1 Pet. ii. 13, 14, to the then existing Roman government; and I have read every 
thing I could obtain from the writings of those who deny this application. 
This view is confirmed by Paul's appeal to Caesar. But it is worthy of spe- 
cial attention that in every one of those passages it is not obedience but sub- 
jection that is commanded. Subjection in these places denotes a passive obe- 
dience to the will of a superior whose power cannot be successfully resisted, 
in the use of lawful means, while there is no proper assent of the will. We 
yield to necessity. Obedience proceeds from that free choice of the will which 
arises from a sense of duty. Thus it appears that a voluntary obedience is 
due to those commands of civil rulers which are lawful, if they rule by the 
consent of the people, notwithstanding they may be transgressors in their 
laws, administrations, or persons. It is, however, impossible to separate civil 
government from religion and morals. It never has been, never can be done. 
We might as readily expect to see a living man without a soul, as a civil go- 
vernment without a moral character. It is this fact which renders it so ne- 
cessary that Christians should make themselves acquainted with the moral 
character of every social and civil action of their lives. Such aetions must 
harmonize with their Christian profession, or that profession becomes a mere 
nullity. If they would escape the pollutions of the world, let them inquire 
into the moral character of the laws, of the administration, and of the rulers 
of their country, and conduct themselves accordingly. Obey or disobey as 
the government obeys or disobeys the Supreme Lawgiver. There is a pas- 
sage in the work, entitled, " A Dispute against the English Popish Ceremo- 
nies," by George Gillespie, a member of the Westminster Assembly., which, 
though long, is worthy of being committed to memory: 



DIVINE AND HUMAN EIGHTS. 7 

we should know the requirements of the divine law in refe- 
rence to civil government, — the obligations we assume by our 
religious profession, — the requirements of the government of 

" Since the power of princes to make laws about things ecclesiastical is not 
absolute, but bound and adstricted unto things lawful and expedient, which 
sort of things, and no other, we are allowed to do for their commandments; 
and since princes many times may, and do, not only transgress those bounds 
and limits, but likewise pretend that they are within the same, when indeed 
they are without them, and enjoin things unlawful and inconvenient, under 
the name, title, and show of things lawful and convenient; therefore it is 
most necessary as well for princes to permit, as for subjects to take liberty 
to try and examine by the judgment of discretion, every thing which autho- 
rity enjoineth, whether it be agreeable or repugnant to the rules of the word; 
and if, after trial, it be found repugnant, to abstain from the doing of the 
same. 

For, 1. The word teacheth us, that the spiritual man judgeth all things, 1 
Cor. ii. 15; trieth the things that are different, Phil i. 10; hath his senses ex- 
ercised to discern both good and evil, Heb. v. 14; and that every one who 
would hold fast that which is good, and abstain from all appearance of evil, 
must first prove all things, 1 Thess. v. 21. 

2. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Rom. xiv. 23. But whatsoever a man 
doth without the trial, knowledge, and persuasion of the lawfulness of it by 
the word of God, that is not of faith; therefore a sin. It is the word of God, 
and not the arbitration of princes whereupon faith is grounded. And though 
the word may be without faith, yet faith cannot be without the word. By it 
therefore must a man try and know assuredly the lawfulness of that which 
he doth. 

3. "Every one of us shall give account of himself to God." But as we 
cannot give an account to God of those actions which we have done in obe- 
dience to our prince, except we have examined, considered and understood 
the lawfulness of the same; so an account could not be required of us for 
them, if we were bound to obey and keep all his ordinances in such sort 
that w T e might not try and examine them, with full liberty to refuse those 
which we judge out of the word to be unlawful or inconvenient; for then 
princes' ordinances were a most sufficient warrant to us: we needed try no 
more. Let him make an account to God of his command; we have account 
to make of our obedience. 

4. If we be bound to receive and obey the laws of princes, without making 
a free trial and examining of the equity of the same, then we could not be 
punished for doing, unwillingly and in ignorance, things unlawful, prescribed 
by them. Whereas every soul that sinneth shall die; and when the blind 
leads the blind, he who is led falls in the ditch as well as his leader. 

5. No man is permitted to do every thing which seemeth right in his eyes, 
and to follow every conceit which takes him in the head; but every man is 
bound to walk by rule, Gal. vi. 6. But the law of a prince cannot be a rule, 
except it be examined whether it be consonant to the word of God, index se- 
cundem legem, and his law is only such a rule as is ruled by a higher rule. 
In so far as it is ruled by the own rule of it, in as far it is a rule to us; and in 
so far as it is not ruled by the own rule of it, in as far it is not a rule to us. 
Quid ergo? an non licebit Christiano cuique convenie?itiam regula et regulati 
(ut vocant) observare? saith Junius. 

0. The rule whereby we ought to walk in all our ways, and according to 



8 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

our country, — and also the degree of harmony that exists be- 
tween these divine and human authorities, before we can know 
either the nature or extent of that obedience which is due to 
the civil authorities under which we live. Without this know- 
ledge we can neither be intelligent nor useful Christians or citi- 
zens; but are continually liable to be made the mere tools of 
ambitious and designing men, to become partakers of other 
men's sins, and finally to make a total shipwreck of faith and a 
good conscience. 

How then is this knowledge to be obtained? Obviously by 
an examination both of our religious obligations, and the con- 
stitutional law of the country, accompanied with a candid com- 
parison of the one with the other. This can be the more easily 
and readily accomplished, as we have a written constitution 

which we ought to frame all our actions, is provided of God a stable and sure 
rule, that it being observed and taken heed unto, may guide and direct our 
practice aright about all those things which it prescribeth. But the law of a 
prince (if we should, without trial and examination, take it for our rule,) 
cannot be such a stable and sure rule. For put the case that a prince enjoin 
two things which sometimes fall out to be incompatible and cannot stand 
together, in that case his law cannot direct our practice, nor resolve us what 
to do; whereas God hath so provided for us, that the case can never occur 
wherein we may not be resolved what to do if we observe the rule which he 
hath appointed us to walk by. 

7. Except this judgment of discretion which we plead for be permitted 
unto us, it will follow that in point of obedience we ought to give no less, 
but as much honour unto princes as unto God himself. For when God pub- 
lisheth his commandments unto us, what greater honour could we give him 
by our obedience than to do that which he commandeth, for his own sole will 
and authority, without making farther inquiry for any other reason? 

8. The Apostle, 1 Cor. vii. 23, forbiddeth us to be the servants of men, that 
is, to do things for which we have no other warrant beside the pleasure and 
will of men. Which interpretation is grounded upon other places of Scrip- 
ture, that teach us we are not bound to obey men in any thing which we 
know not to be according to the will of God, Eph. vi. 6, 7; that we ought not 
to live to the lusts of men; but to the will of God, 1 Fet. iv. 3, and that, there- 
fore, we ought in every thing to prove what is acceptable to the Lord, Eph. 
v. 20. 

9. They who cleanse their way must take heed thereto according to the word, 
Fsal. cxix. 9; therefore, if we take not heed to our way, according to the 
word, we do not cleanse it. They who would walk as the children of light, 
must have the word for a lamp unto their feet, and a light unto their path, 
Fsal. cxix. 105; therefore, if we go in any path without the light of the word 
to direct us, we walk in darkness and stumble, because we see not where we 
go. They who would not be unwise, but walk circumspectly, must under- 
stand what the will of the Lord is, Eph. v. 17; therefore, if we understand 
not what the will of the Lord is concerning that which we do, we are un- 
wise, and walk not circumspectly. 



DIVINJ2 AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 9 

which is the supreme law of the land. Let us then inquire,— 
First, What are the moral qualities necessary, in a civil go- 
vernment, in order that it may harmonize with the divine law? 
Secondly, Whether the Westminster Confession of Faith har- 
monize with the holy scriptures in reference to the magistrate's 
power and duty concerning religion? Thirdly, Whether the 
constitution of the United States possess the requisite moral 
qualities? 

I. What are the moral qualities necessary in a civil govern- 
ment, in order that it may harmonize with the divine law? 
We answer,— 

1. It must recognise the being of God, and enter into a 
formal obligation, to yield obedience to his law.* This obliga- 
tion obviously arises from God's essential dominion over his 
creatures. The light of nature clearly teaches that God is, and 
must be, the moral governor of the world, the fountain of all 
governmental authority. This first principle of nature's light 
is fully confirmed by the light of revelation. " There is no 
power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of God," 
Rom. xiii. 1. "Thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the 
kingdoms of the earth," 2 Kings, xix. 15, Is. xxxvii. 16. "0 
Lord God of our fathers, rulest not thou over all the kingdoms 
of the heathen?" 2 Chron. xx. 6. "Who would not fear thee, 
king of nations?" Jer. x. 7. Accordingly, God in his provi- 
dence not only raises up distinct and independent nations, and 
appoints the extent of their jurisdiction, but also gives and 
removes their rulers. " The Most High divided to the nations 
their inheritance," Deut. xxxii. 8. "He hath determined the 
times before appointed, and the boundsof their habitation," Acts 
xvii. 26. "He removeth kings, and setteth up kings," Dan. 

* " By the law of God I understand here jus divinum naturale, that is, the 
moral law or decalogue, as it bindeth all nations (whether Christians or infi- 
dels,) being the law of the Creator and king of the nations. The magis- 
trate, by his authority, may, and in duty ought, to keep his subjects within 
the bounds of external obedience to that law, and punish the external man 
with external punishments for external trespasses against that law. From 
this obligation of the law, and subjection to the corrective power of the ma- 
gistrate, Christian subjects are no more exempted than heathen subjects, but 
rather more straitly obliged. So that if any such trespass is committed by 
officers or members, the magistrate hath power and authority to summon, ex- 
amine, judge, and (after just conviction and proof) to punish these, as well 
as other men. We do therefore abominate the disloyal papal tenet, that cler- 
gymen are not to be examined and judged by civil, but by ecclesiastical courts 
only, even in cases civil and criminal." — Aaron's Rod Blossoming, p. 121. 



10 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

ii. 21. Such being God's authority and right of dominion over 
the nations of the earth, in their conventional character, he has 
punished and will continue to punish all national disobedience 
to his law. " If they will not obey, I will utterly pluck up 
and destroy that nation, saith the Lord," Jer. xii. 17. "The 
wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget 
God," Ps. ix. 17; see also Ps. Ixxix. 6. Even national forget- 
fulness of national duties to God, where no iniquity is posi- 
tively decreed by law, shall be punished with national destruc- 
tion and with future wrath upon the individuals thus guilty. 
But here we are met with an objection that Joseph and Daniel 
held office under heathen govern ments which were not only 
forgetful of God, but also guilty of active disobedience to the 
divine law; and therefore that Christians may now lawfully 
hold office under such governments. But suppose the objection 
true as here stated, it can no more prove the inference, than 
the fact that Moses permitted a plurality of wives will prove 
that polygamy is a Christian duty. But it is evident that neither 
Joseph nor Daniel obeyed any human authority inconsistent 
with the claims of the divine law; nor did they enter into any 
engagement by oath, covenant, or otherwise to obey or enforce 
any human law not in harmony with the divine law. Pharaoh 
acknowledged that Joseph was in possession of the Spirit of 
inspiration, and that his people should be ruled according to the 
word of Joseph, before he accepted office under the king of 
Egypt, Gen. xli. 38 — 40. The same thing is also true of 
Daniel, — " The king answered unto Daniel, and said, Of a truth 
it is, that your God is God of gods, and a Lord of kings," Dan. 
ii. 47. It is sufficient cause for deep grief that people should 
be led astray by a misapplication of these examples. They 
fully sustain our position. Thus it is demonstrated that no 
nation can violate the divine law, and hope to escape with 
impunity. 

2. Nations who enjoy the light of revelation, must, in order 
to harmonize with the divine law, recognise the Lord Jesus 
Christ in his mediatorial office, and enter into a formal obliga- 
tion to yield obedience to him in their conventional character, 
as he is the administrator of the law of nature. 

To prevent misapprehension, and enable the attentive reader 
to understand our meaning in this proposition, it is necessary 
to advert briefly to the nature of the mediatorial office. " There 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 11 

is," says Gillespie, " in the Mediator Jesus Christ, 1. Dignity, 
excellency, honour, glory, and splendour. 2. Mighty power, by 
which he is able to do in heaven and earth whatsoever he will. 
3. His kingdom,' 7 by which he means the church. But he denies 
that civil government is put into his hand. It is true, as will 
be at once admitted by all who have studied the subject, that 
magistracy is founded in nature, not in the mediatorial autho- 
rity of Christ; that magistrates hold their office from the three 
one God as the moral governor, and not from God as the sa- 
viour of sinners; that the natural law is the rule of adminis- 
tration, and not the law as connected with the arrangements 
of the covenant of grace. These truths are now so generally 
admitted that we need not offer any proof in this place. But 
subsequent writers have stated the doctrine of Christ's media- 
torial office in a more clear and satisfactory manner, although 
Mr. Gillespie's book taken as a whole has probably never been 
surpassed. The Lord Jesus Christ should be considered by us 
both in his person and office. In his person and essential do- 
minion he is equal with the Father and the Spirit. " Thou art 
my Son." The declaration of a fact, an eternal truth, express- 
ing the necessary, eternal sonship of Christ, "This day have I 
begotten thee," to the mediatorial office.* Therefore it has 
been well said, — " He had been the natural son of God, though 
he had not been mediator, and though men had not been re- 
deemed. But if you suppose the Son of God reigns not as 
God, with the Father and the Holy Ghost from everlasting 
to everlasting, then you must needs suppose that he is not the 
natural and eternal Son of God." Christ then has a two-fold 
kingdom, essential, and mediatorial. It is the latter after 
which we now inquire. Here we observe, — 1. That this king- 
dom is the church, not simply all the redeemed, but all who 
by a public profession of his name acknowledge him as their 
King and Redeemer. We know that some in this kingdom 
are unworthy subjects, and will not reign with Christ in glory. 
But they acknowledge his authority and their obligation to 
obedience. 2. As King in Zion he is invested with universal 
dominion. Therefore it has been beautifully remarked, almost 
in the words of David, that " he ruleth in Jacob and for Jacob 
to the ends of the earth." This doctrine shines throughout the 

* Many refer the term "begotten" to his sonship instead of his office: we 
will not dispute with them, but we cannot comprehend their meaning. 



12 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

inspired volume. "Then cometh the end, when he shall have 
delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he 
shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For 
he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The 
last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put 
all things under his feet. But when he saith, All things are 
put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted which did put 
all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued 
unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him 
that put all things under him, that God may be all in all," 1 
Cor. xv. 24 — 28. On this passage, let it be observed, 1. In the 
end Christ is to deliver up the kingdom to the Father. What 
kingdom? Not his essential, not his peculiar kingdom, his 
headship over the redeemed; for in regard to this kingdom the 
Father saith, "Thy throne, God, is for ever and ever." " He 
shall reign for ever." It is true, he shall introduce his redeemed 
children to his Father without spot or blemish, that they may 
receive a visible token of the Father's love, as Joseph presented 
his children to his father, but he shall not cease to reign over 
them for ever and ever. To suppose otherwise would rob both 
him and his redeemed of the most precious gem in their mu- 
tual crown of glory. While he is crowned, in our nature and 
as our king, in that :ft *giory which he had with the Father before 
the world was," his children will rejoice in seeing him as he 
is, in being like him, and in eternally filling heaven with the 
melody of his praise. "Unto him that loved us, and washed 
us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and 
priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion 
for ever and ever." If these things be so, then it is, it must 
be, his universal kingdom or dominion over all the creatures for 
the good of his church which is then surrendered to the Father. 
This dominion was always incidental, tributary, or subsidiary, 
and its exercise will then be no longer necessary, all enemies 
having been subdued. But this does not render his universal 
dominion the less obligatory upon the creatures, so long as it 
shall continue; nor will it exempt the disobedient from condign 
punishment. " He must reign till he hath put all enemies under 
his feet." 2. Civil authority, though it emanate from God as 
moral governor, is under the dominion of Christ as mediator. 
The natural law of magistracy is administered by him. The 
providential government of the world is also in the hand of 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 13 

Christ as mediator. He only is "excepted which did put all 
things under him." The Mediator led Israel out of Egypt and 
hrough the wilderness, opening the sea, raining manna, ar- 
resting the natural laws of the material world again and again, 
' ill David and Solomon, his eminent types, held heathen nations 
tributary to their thrones. " Behold, I send an Angel before 
thee, to keep thee in the way, and bring thee into the place 
which I have prepared/' Exod. xxiii. 20. "And the Angel 
of the Lord said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, 
seeing it is Wonderful?" Judges xiii. 18. "His name shall be 
called Wonderful," Is. ix. 6. " In all their afflictions he was 
afflicted, and the Angel of his presence saved them: in his love 
and in his pity he redeemed them: and he bare them and car- 
ried them all the days of old," Is. Ixiii. 9. This doctrine does 
not exclude the Father from the exercise of government, or 
providence, but includes both the Father and the Spirit; they 
indeed act through, or by the Mediator. " My Father worketh 
hitherto, and I work," John v. 17. " The words that I speak 
unto you, I speak not of myself; but the Father that dwelleth in 
me, he doeth the works. Believe me, that I am in the Father, 
and the Father in me," John xiv. 10, 11. We see not, then, 
how the conclusion can be avoided, that the nations of the earth 
are bound to acknowledge the Lord Jesus Cn ist in his mediatorial 
office, and enter into a formal obligation to obey him in their con- 
ventional character, as he is the administrator of the law of nature. 
It follows, also, that as our Lord overrules and directs natural 
things to supernatural ends for the good of his church, so he has 
a mediatorial dominion over natural things; for how should he 
give direction to that over which he possesses no dominion? 

How far nations, as such, are to yield obedience to the Lord 
Jesus Christ as he is the administrator of the law in its con- 
nexion with the covenant of grace, will appear more clearly in 
a subsequent part of the discourse. Our business at present is 
to prove the proposition just laid down. It will be readily 
conceded by all who have any knowledge of the subject, for 
reasons which need not be mentioned here, that all power 
delegated to Christ is also mediatorial. What then says the 
Father? "I will make him my first born, higher than the 
kings of the earth," Ps. lxxxix. 21. To this the Son re- 
sponds, — " Thou hast given him power over all flesh," John 
xvii. 2. Hence says the apostle, the Father "hath put all 
2 



14 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

things under his feet," 1 Cor. xv. 27. Compare Ps. viii. with 
Heb. ii. 6 — 8. David, foreseeing by the Spirit the exaltation 
of Christ at the right hand of the Father " in heavenly places, 
far above all principality, and power, and might, and domi- 
nion," (Eph. i. 20, 21,) celebrates the glorious event in the 
47th Psalm, — « God is gone up with a shout, the Lord with 
the sound of a trumpet; for God is king of all the earth; God 
reigneth over the heathen." If, then, Christ as mediator is 
the king of nations, it seems necessarily to follow that he ad- 
ministers the law of nature to the nations, considered as distinct 
from its connexion with the covenant of grace; he having 
committed the administration of that covenant, not to magis- 
trates, but to officers appointed specially for that purpose; from 
which it also follows, that magistrates, as such, can exercise no 
jurisdiction in the church, and that their jurisdiction in refe- 
rence to the church is merely external, but sufficient to restrain 
her from all external violations of the law of nature. The Lord 
Jesus Christ has given the magistrate this power over his 
church. In externals, she has no more right to transgress the 
law of nature, by public doctrines or ceremonies, under any 
pretence whatever, than any other association or corporate 
body, or individual. And the magistrate is as much bound to 
rule her, in these respects, as any other association. In the ex- 
ercise of this power the magistrate prohibits the church from 
usurping any portion of his authority. But the magistrate 
must also obey those commands of Christ which require him to 
recognise, protect, and sustain his church in the full enjoyment 
of all her vested privileges. The view here taken is fully sus- 
tained by the scriptures already cited, and by many other 
similar passages. Our Lord declares, " By me kings reign and 
princes decree justice. By me princes rule, and nobles, even 
all the judges of the earth," Prov, viii. 15, 16. And John gives 
him the title, — "Prince of the kings of the earth," Rev. i. 5. 
Therefore magistrates are commanded to know, obey, and fear 
this King of kings: "Be wise now therefore, ye kings; be 
instructed, ye judges of the earth; serve the Lord with fear," 
Ps. ii. 12. "God standeth in the congregation of the mighty: 
he judgeth among the gods. How long will ye judge unjustly, 
and accept the persons of the wicked?" Ps. lxxxii. 1, 2. And 
in thus obeying Christ, the magistrate must recognise the 
diurch, wherever she exists within the bounds of his jurisdio- 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 15 

tion, as a subject of his government, entitled to his protection, 
and externally subject to his authority in lawful commands, 
"Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm," 
Ps. cv. 15. 

3. If the preceding propositions be true, a third necessarily 
follows, namely: That civil government, in order to harmonize 
with divine authority, must receive the law of nature, however 
made known, whether administered by God as Ruler or Re- 
deemer, as the true and only basis of all human authority, and 
enter into a formal obligation to obey its requirements. In com- 
mon discourse the law of nature is frequently confounded with 
the light of nature. The light of nature is simply that degree of 
knowledge which men may or do possess of the law of nature, 
while destitute of a special revelation. But we have the law 
itself. Its characters are so obscured, or rather blotted out of 
the soul, that the heathen can only read it through the dispen- 
sations of Divine Providence; but we have it in words which 
we can read and understand, and of whose meaning there can 
be no rational doubt. Therefore the nations of Christendom 
have not a shadow of excuse for their transgressions of this 
law. "They have no cloak for their sin." This law is the 
jus divinum of both civil and ecclesiastical government. Every 
law of man which does not harmonize with this original grant of 
power is a usurpation, a tyranny, and null from the beginning. It 
is a blow aimed at the fountain of all power: it is a contempt 
tuous disregard of the being and authority of God: it is re- 
bellion against the moral government of the world: it is man 
striving with his Maker: it spreads desolation through this 
world, and supplies hell with its miserable inhabitants. To 
demonstrate that such is the character of every human law, 
not authorized by the law of nature, the original grant of power, 
we have only to consider, — 1. That its claims have never been 
set aside, nor even varied in a solitary act of the divine govern- 
ment. Positive law may be repealed — the natural law of the 
material world may be held in equilibrio, the waters may di- 
vide, the planets rest in their course, for the redemption of the 
church, but " till heaven and earth pass away, not one jot, nor 
one tittle shall pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." The law 
of the Lord « liveth and abideth for ever." 2. That " whoso- 
ever shall keep the whole law, and offend in one point is guilty 
of all." — These things are true. If the transgressor escape the 



16 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

penalty of this law, the precious blood of Christ must be the 
price of his deliverance. 

We do not assert that every violation of the divine law de- 
stroys the being of the civil government thus guilty; nor that 
it will render its authority null, when it requires obedience to 
commands that harmonize with the original grant of power. 
We have ever regarded such a position as inconsistent with 
scripture and right reason. It is not every violation of law 
that nullifies the obligations of those natural, social and official 
relations, which God has constituted. It seems there is but 
one sin only that can dissolve the obligations of the marriage 
covenant. 

So the warrant for setting up civil government, being from 
God, it being right in the matter of it, and the form being left 
to human discretion, we see not how the immoralities of men, 
in incorporating unlawful principles into their constitution, can 
nullify those which are lawful. Such cases do indeed call for 
Christians to protest against these unlawful enactments, and 
forego all civil privileges the enjoyment of which would imply 
an acknowledgment of these immoralities. 

It is difficult, if not impossible, to know precisely the point 
in transgression where the obligation of subjects to their rulers 
ceases to bind the conscience in regard to things lawful. Nor is 
it essential that we should possess this knowledge, as God claims 
the prerogative of removing and setting up rulers. They may 
hold their office legally in his sight, or only by providential 
permission, for the punishment of their sins, and the sins of 
their subjects. The solution of the question, then, whether 
they have a valid commission in the sight of God, or are re- 
garded by him as mere usurpers, comes not ordinarily within 
the scope of our duties. It belongs to God. If the magistrate, 
though wicked, and though required by the constitution to 
execute some laws that are immoral, hold office by the will of 
the nation, legally expressed through the constitutional form 
of their own choice, it seems clear enough, that his office must 
be so far valid in the sight of the nation as to require obedi- 
ence to his lawful commands, whatever it may be in the sight 
of God. God has given them a king in anger, not in the exer- 
cise of his preceptive will, but in his providential permission 
of man's free agency, for the abuse of which he will inflict 
punishment. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 17 

In order to understand this subject, as it applies to our own 
country, it is necessary that we should descend a little more 
into detail. We have a written constitution, a legislative au- 
thority, a judiciary to vindicate this constitution from aggres- 
sions of every kind; and an executive power; each of these 
powers distinctly, and all conjointly, being the creatures of the 
constitution. But these officers receive their appointment 
from the people from whom also the constitution emanated. 
These facts present us with three distinct questions, namely, 

1. What is our duty in reference to the constitution? 2. In 
reference to the exercise of the elective franchise and holding 
office? And 3. In reference to obedience to the administration 
of the government? 

1. What is our duty in reference to the constitution of our 
own country? We answer, the law requires that it maintain 
and enforce its principles, which our Lord has thus briefly ex- 
pressed, — " Do to others as you would that others should do to 
you." So far as it violates this principle it is null ab initio* 
The people have the right to make a constitution, but not the 
right to violate this first social law of nature. Hence says 
the Spirit of God', % Wo unto them that decree unrighteous 
decrees." Is. x. 1. " Wo unto him that buildeth his house by 
unrighteousness, and his chambers by wrong; that useth his 
neighbour's service without wages, and giveth him not for 
his work." Jer. xxii. 13. "Wo unto him that established a 
city by iniquity." Hab. ii. 12. " Wo unto you, lawyers! for 
ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne." Luke xi. 
46. " I beheld the tears of such as were oppressed; on the 
side of their oppressors there was power; but they had no eom^- 
forter." Eccl. iv. 1. "Loose the bands of wickedness, undo 
the heavy burdens, let the oppressed go free, break every yoke." 
Is. lviii. 6. " house of David, thus saith the Lord, Execute 
judgment in the morning, [speedily,] and deliver him that is 
spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor, lest my fury go out 
like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil 
of your doings." Jer. xxi. 12. But why multiply quotations 
to prove an eternal truth, lying clearly within the scope of 
nature's light, and yet almost universally treated with con- 
tempt by this nation? It is concluded then that every consti- 
tution of civil government, so far as it disregards the principle 
here laid down, is absolutely void,— that the oath of allegiance 

2* 



18 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

to such a constitution is worthy to be taken only by a nation 
of atheists. How can a man swear in the church to obey 
the divine law, and also swear in the state to break it, and be 
innocent? 

2. The exercise of the elective franchise, and the holding 
office under such a constitution are of the same character; for 
if we may not take the oath of allegiance we may not hold 
office, nor by our suffrage encourage others to do it, which can 
only be done by taking the oath. 

3. What then is the nature and degree of that obedience 
which we owe to such a constitution and the laws enacted un- 
der it? In regard to those provisions of the constitution and 
the laws enacted for their enforcement, which violate the 
principle laid down in this head of discourse, it is perfectly 
clear that we can yield no other obedience than that which 
weakness surrenders to superior and irresistible power: we can 
only obey for wrath's sake. 

And this obedience for wrath's sake can be only passive, and 
yielded under a protest against its iniquity. If the magistrate 
go a step beyond this, and require active obedience to any im- 
moral law, active resistance even unto blood becomes at once 
necessary. " Fear not them who kill the body, but are not 
able to kill the soul; but rather fear him who is able to destroy 
both soul and body in hell."' " He that findeth his life shall 
lose it, and he that loseth his life for my sake, shall find it." 
Mat. x, 28, 39. 

But in every such constitution many lawful principles are 
imbodied. We see not how it can be possible for men seri- 
ously to frame a form of government without some good degree 
of conformity to the law of nature. How then are we to re- 
gard our obligation to obey those things which are lawful? 
We are inclined to place our obedience to such laws in the 
same category with that which is due to wicked magistrates 
who administer a righteous government in a righteous manner. 
« Infidelity, or difference in religion, doth not make void the 
magistrate's just and legal authority, nor free the people from 
their due obedience to him." Conf. Chap, xxiii. Sec. 4. Why 
then should the wickedness of one law nullify all others that 
are righteous, any more than the wickedness of a magistrate 
should have this effect in relation to his righteous acts of ad- 
ministration? We confess our inability to perceive the differ- 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 19 

ence. If then I am correct, on this principle, we may avail 
ourselves of the protection of any civil government under 
which we may be placed in the providence of God, and may 
cheerfully pay our ratio of its taxes, as a quid pro quo, taxes for 
protection. We may sit on juries in those cases where no 
oath of allegiance to the constitution is required and where 
the law by which the cause is to be decided is righteous, the 
jury being sworn to render a true verdict according to the law 
and the facts. In a civil cause, when his life was threatened by 
violence, Paul appealed to Caesar. 

The history of Saul seems to illustrate the view here ad- 
vanced. The people in the exercise of their right to set up 
magistracy, sinned, because they were influenced by a desire 
to evade at least some of the restraints of the divine law. 
They rejected God. 1 Sam. viii. 7. Yet God would not re- 
peal his law which required men to choose magistrates, (Ex. 
xviii. 17—26, 1 Pet. ii. 13,) nor do violence to man's free 
agency, because men abused both, but take his own time and 
way to punish the transgressors. Therefore he directs Samuel 
to comply with their request, to make a king, God himself 
appointing the individual. At the same time Samuel is direct- 
ed to declare the evils that would follow, and solemnly to pro- 
test against them. 1 Sam. viii. 9. Saul also reigned several 
years after God had rejected him from being king. 1 Sam. 
xxv. 15. Yet who can doubt the obligation of the people during 
that period to obey Saul in lawful commands? 1 Sam. xii. 14. 
The misery of that people was brought upon them chiefly on 
account of their obedience to the unlawful commands of their 
kings. So voluntary obedience to wicked laws of our own 
making, administered by wicked rulers of our own choosing, 
must certainly prove the ruin of our country, if the evil be not 
speedily removed, and the everlasting ruin of those who are 
thus guilty, if they repent not. But the reflection, that millions 
of human souls, coming into the world in each successive ge- 
neration, during the continuance of these iniquitous govern- 
ments, are through their influence snared and taken, and eter- 
nally lost, is not the least bitter ingredient in that cup which 
constitutes the afflictions of the righteous. " Give ye ear, 
house of the king; for judgment is toward you, because ye 
have been a snare on Mizpeh, and a net spread upon Tabor." 
Hosea v. 1. "For the statutes of Omri are kept, and all the 



20 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

works of the house of Ahab, and ye walk in their counsels." 
Micah vi. 16. Infidels may say these scriptures are not ap- 
plicable to us, but Christians will not. 

So the administrations of all the kings of Judah were of a 
mixed character, partly moral, partly immoral. The same 
doctrine is proved from the history of the kings of Israel. 
The revolt of the ten tribes proved in the end to be a total 
apostacy. Yet it is evident that God recognised their authority 
to enforce lawful commands, while he punished them for im- 
moral acts of administration, and the people for yielding a vo- 
luntary obedience to their unlawful commands. Compare 2 
Kings x. 29 — 31, with Micah vi. 16. Were it necessary, many 
similar examples might be adduced. It is not then a passive 
subjection to wicked laws and rulers, nor obedience to their 
lawful commands, when we give them no countenance in their 
crimes, and have neither the authority nor the power to break 
their yoke, that will destroy us; but our doing that which God 
prohibits. Let the following position be duly weighed, — the 
good actions of wicked men, because they proceed from vicious 
principles, are not accepted in the sight of God, as to the agents 
themselves; but being good in their own nature, are accepted 
as they terminate upon others, who give no countenance to those 
actions which are wicked, in the agents. 

On this principle, the apostle instructs us to buy in the mar- 
ket, asking no questions. On this principle, we justify the de- 
putation from the Free Church of Scotland in receiving the 
money of slaveholders, provided they did not connive at sla- 
very in order to obtain the money. If they did countenance 
slavery, they cannot be innocent. That Dr. Burns did not, the 
evidence is conclusive; — for he boldly denounced instrumental 
music, choirs, human psalmody, &c. in the worship of God, as 
also slavery wherever he went. 

Why should the wickedness of a father make it sinful in the 
child to obey his lawful commands? But still it is urged that 
the constitution contains sinful provisions which render it ab- 
solutely invalid. True, in regard to these sinful provisions, 
it is so. But the constitution of the ten tribes contained sinful 
provisions. Why then should this invalidate those provisions 
which are not sinful? But it is urged farther, that the nation 
is bound to recognise the being of God in their constitution. 
True, but does their refusal destroy their being as a nation, 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 21 

or the being of their magistracy, or their right to enforce and 
obey the social law of nature, in every thing, which they are 
willing to do? God in his providence may and does overthrow 
nations for their rejection of him, but till he do this, the mino- 
rity, protesting against their sins, must regard the lawful com- 
mands of their magistrates as valid. An atheistical drunkard 
may eventually lose the ability, but not the right, to support his 
family, at least he cannot lose this right, so long as the ability 
remain. 

But some will still cavil and maintain that we must reject 
the government of our country altogether as the ordinance of 
Satan, or we must yield obedience to it altogether as the ordi- 
nance of God. If we will not swear allegiance, we cannot con- 
sistently claim protection, pay taxes, nor consume the products 
of slave labour, &c. They reject the middle ground here as- 
sumed, and consequently, while a very few become perfect 
anarchists, the great mass rush heedlessly and recklessly into 
the active support of the government, in immoralities and ty- 
ranny as execrable as ever the world saw! For the sake of 
the youth of our country, who are deceived by this specious, 
but fallacious reasoning, let the following things be considered. 
1. We do not expect perfection either in laws, or their admi- 
nistration, but we deny in every instance the validity of laws 
which infringe upon the inalienable rights with which God has 
invested human nature. 2. There is a difference between obe- 
dience to the lawful requirements of a constitution which con- 
tains some unlawful provisions and swearing the oath of alle- 
giance. In the former case we reject that which is unlawful, 
in the latter we recognise it. But still some will say we only 
swear to obey such provisions as are agreeable to the divine law. 
If so, why not make this exception when taking the oath? 
If the magistrate administering the oath will permit me to make 
the exception, as publicly as he administers the oath, and with 
the same solemnity, I will take it; but this he will not, cannot 
do. I must either swear to sustain all its provisions or reject 
all. To swear allegiance then to its unlawful provisions with 
the view of abolishing those provisions, is to imitate the Jesuits 
of Great Britain who swear to support the British constitution 
that they may destroy it. It is worse than this, it is like 
swearing allegiance to the devil's kingdom as the first step for 
its overthrow! To take this step is to subvert both law and 



22 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

common sense, and to make ourselves guilty of odious hypo- 
crisy. But we hope in this way to effect an amendment, and 
how can it be done in any other way? Our fathers, who, 
through cowardice admitted slavery into the constitution, hoped 
that its conservative principles would soon eradicate the evil. 
How has a period of sixty years mocked their vain hope! It 
is not for us to say how the constitution is to be amended. 
Let those who swear to it amend it, or bear the punishment of 
their iniquity. This we know, that we are not permitted to 
do evil that good may come; not to swear to a lie, that we may 
vindicate truth! Some will say " physician heal thyself," for 
it is well known that the writer of these passages, born on the 
soil, has himself frequently exercised the elective franchise, 
and it is probable he would have continued to do so through 
life, had not the word of God taught him better. The evil is 
so common that it scarcely attracts attention. 3. There is a 
difference between active voluntary obedience, and subjection to 
law. God does not require active obedience, or the performance 
of social duties from his people, when any external physical or 
moral hinderance is in the way which they have no power to 
remove. He does not require you to liberate the captive while 
you are chained to a rock. So neither when you have liberty 
does he require you as an individual to break the law in order 
to restrain another man's transgression. If I see one man rob 
or murder another and the civil magistrate stand over me with 
a sword, saying, if you move a finger to rescue the oppressed, I 
will cut you down, I am not bound as an individual to interfere, 
except by protest; because God has given me neither authority 
nor power as an individual to offer active resistance in such 
cases. Neither are Christians to run unsent into persecution. 
We are not answerable for other men's sins against which we 
protest, if we have neither power nor authority to prevent 
them. If the magistrate require me to acknowledge that he is 
right, or to assist him, I must then resist even unto blood, — 
prefer suffering to sinning. 

In cases where a revolution by force becomes necessary, it 
can only be done by regular political organization, by setting 
up and fighting for a lawful against an unlawful form of govern- 
ment. God then has give'n neither to individuals nor mobs the 
right to resist magistrates. Here some of the abolitionists have 
erred. In such cases individuals submit to necessity. But it 



DIVINE AND HUMAN EIGHTS. 23 

is the duty of the community to interfere at once through 
their conventional forms of political action. But who does not 
see the difference between this kind of subjection and a volun- 
tary oath to join with robbers and murderers to help on the 
work of wrong and death? If there be any who cannot see 
this difference, it would be the height of folly to reason with 
them. 4. There is a difference between paying taxes and 
swearing allegiance. (1.) I am not individually responsible for 
the magistrate's abuse of the public money if I took no part 
in his elevation. (2.) Government in itself is right, and the 
simple payment of money to its support a duty if no sinful 
condition be imposed. (3.) Necessity comes in here, the ma- 
gistrate commands, and I must obey, especially as he allows 
me to accompany my payment of it with a protest against its 
perversion to unholy purposes. But why did the martyrs 
suffer? Not for refusing subjection, in the sense of Paul, as has 
been explained; not for refusing the payment of taxes; but for 
refusing to renounce the law of God. Yet we voluntarily do 
this, that we may secure political advantages, carnal interests, 
and the friendship of the world. For if there be any truth in 
the scriptures, the oath of allegiance to the constitution of the 
United States is a renunciation of the divine law; it is swear- 
ing in the name of the living God that we renounce his law 
for the gratification of our lusts! Let him who can avoid this 
conclusion. And to the great mass of my countrymen, in- 
volved in this sin, I say look to yourselves. The Jews would 
not listen to the overwhelming evidence which the Son of God 
laid before them, that he was indeed the Christ, because they 
judged that a national recognition of Christ would injure their 
worldly interests. You know the result: you ought to know 
that like causes produce like effects. But we perceive that you 
are wedded to your idols. Go on, fill up your cup. Never- 
theless, my soul shall weep in secret places for your pride. 
(5.) But it is inconsistent for you to purchase and consume the 
product of slave labour, if you refuse allegiance to the constitu- 
tion, say our opponents. Well, then, you are content to make 
my inconsistency your apology for renouncing the divine law, 
under the solemnity of an oath! I am not bound to reconcile 
the inconsistency of men in this argument. I am explaining 
and labouring to enforce the claims of law. But I am content 
to take the apostle's advice in this matter, and buv whatsoever 



24 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

is offered in the shambles, asking no questions for conscience 
sake. If the seller tell me this is the production of slave labour, 
and I understand by your purchase that you approve of slavery, 
I will let him keep his goods, or dispose of them to another. 
But the ten thousand objections to law, invented by infidelity 
and carnal interest, are unworthy of notice. The Almighty 
will sweep them away in the whirlwind and furious storms of 
his wrath. The world must one day learn that God reigns. 

The conclusion, then, is, that we are bound to obey the law- 
ful commands of magistrates, ruling by the consent of the na- 
tion, not merely because they are right, but also from a regard 
to the powers that be. Nor do we see any practical utility in 
a controversy respecting the validity of the magistrate's power 
in the sight of God, provided he rules by the consent of the 
nation. For both parties come to the same practical result; 
both obey his lawful commands because they are right; both 
obey these commands also from a regard to the magistrate. 
The one indeed for wrath's sake only, but the other also for 
conscience' sake. The former do indeed seem to exclude 
themselves from a voluntary payment of taxes, as well as from 
lawful protection, if any of the laws should be immoral, or at 
least if any of the constitutional provisions should be so, while 
the latter, in such circumstances, may avail themselves of pro- 
tection and pay taxes with a good conscience, to a wicked 
government. 

But the doctrine here advanced requires to be well guarded 
with suitable limitations, or it will be in danger of perversion 
and abuse. If, while yielding obedience to the lawful com- 
mands of magistrates, some of whose requirements are unlawful, 
we refuse to bear an explicit testimony against those which are 
unlawful; or, if our obedience would infer a justification, or 
recognition as valid, of those things which are unlawful, we 
cannot obey voluntarily without guilt. Again: If we yield a 
voluntary consent to a form of government, much more if we 
swear to maintain it, while it imbodies unlawful requirements, 
we are guilty. If we use any portion of political power which 
we may possess to establish, or perpetuate, when established, 
any such form of government; or, if we use that power for the 
elevation of men to office, whom we have no evidence to re- 
gard as men "fearing God and hating covetousness," when we 
have no reasonable assurance to believe that they will prove 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 25 

« a terror to evil doers and a praise to them that do well," we 
are guilty, and make ourselves personally responsible for all 
the moral evil that may characterize their administration. God 
never permitted us to do an immoral act to procure a good, or 
avoid an evil. 

But civil government being the ordinance of man, (1 Pet. ii. 
13,) as well as the ordinance of God, will it not follow that 
nations have a right to enact laws not founded upon the ten 
commandments? Civil government is the ordinance of man 
only in reference to its outward form, to questions of expedi- 
ency, to incidental details, &c, but in no sense is it the ordi- 
nance of man in reference to its moral principles. It is the 
conformity of human law to the original grant of power that 
constitutes its binding obligation. He that yields a voluntary 
obedience to human law, which infringes upon this original 
grant, casts himself into the jaws of a ferocious beast, which 
will " tear the soul, rending it in pieces while there is none to 
deliver." We are not to live for the gratification of the lusts 
of men; and let those who enforce their own will upon others 
in violation of the eternal law of righteousness, merely because 
God in his providence has given them the power, look well to 
themselves, before they awake in the flames of divine and end- 
less wrath. "Power belongs to God." And " shall not the 
Judge of all the earth do right?" To suppose that nations may 
make and enforce such laws as they please, because civil go- 
vernment is the ordinance of man, would repeal the divine law, 
make men independent of God, and exclude him from the go- 
vernment of his creatures, so far as this can be done by human 
will and power. Such has ever been, and must continue to be 
the practical effect, where the ten commandments are not made 
the fundamental constitution of all human law, and the supreme 
rule of all human administrations. Every government must 
necessarily possess its first principles; and these must be either 
human or divine. If the ten commandments be rejected, the 
will of man becomes the supreme law to man; and the promise 
of Satan, t{ ye shall be as gods," is made good. " Lo, they have 
rejected the word of the Lord, and what wisdom is in them?" 
Jer. viii. 9. 

If individuals are not permitted to make active resistance to 
magistrates, as explained p. 22, how can those benevolent indi- 
viduals in the free states who assist slaves to escape be justi- 
3 



26 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

fied? It is replied, first, that the law prohibits them from 
returning the runaway to his master; but it does not require 
them to go into a slave state and help them run away. The 
slave is already away before the supposed assistance is rendered. 
They therefore, who, in any manner, actively assist in forcing 
the slave's return to his master, defy the authority of the God 
of heaven, and must answer to him. If the law did not permit a 
Hebrew servant to be returned who enjoyed the means of reli- 
gious instruction, and the protection of personal rights, it can- 
not permit the return of an American slave, who has been 
robbed of his all. But still, by aiding the slave, they violate the 
law of the country which requires his return. It is true 
they do so; but neither that law, nor any other law by 
which the slave is held has any binding obligation; the reluc- 
tance of magistrates to enforce a law which violates the rights 
of human nature, or the force of right public opinion, is such, 
that either the magistrate connives at their conduct or is unable 
to restrain them. This is matter of joy. It is an opening in 
Providence enabling good men to extend a helping hand to the 
oppressed. The reason then why the individual can make no 
active resistance to the unlawful acts of the magistrate as ex- 
plained p. 22, is not because the law under which the magistrate 
acts has any validity, but because the individual has not, as such, 
either the authority or power to remedy the evil. To deny 
this, and maintain the right of individuals to make active re- 
sistance to magistrates is to bury in one common ruin all go- 
vernment, good and bad, civil and ecclesiastical. How the 
right of private judgment consists with this doctrine will be 
shown in a subsequent section. 

4. It follows that civil governments favoured with revelation, 
are bound to require of their subjects, and, if need be, enforce 
upon them, an outward conformity to both tables of the moral 
law, in all their natural, social, and official relations. This po- 
sition requires no proof. It rests upon the preceding proposi- 
tions. If they have been proved, this follows as a necessary 
consequence. The magistrate then, must, in general, under 
the penalty of his country's ruin, and the loss of his personal 
salvation, in case of disobedience, suppress and punish, if 
need be, avowed atheism, image worship, heresy,* public 

* We use the term "heresy " in its legal sense, as it is evidently used by 
the "Westminster Confession, and defined by our lexicographers, which con- 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 27 

blasphemy, open breaches of the Sabbath, insubordination of 
every kind, breaches of the peace, drunkenness, keepers and fre- 
quenters of brothels, — the venders of lascivious books, pictures, 
&c., — fraud, theft, and gambling, libellous publications and per- 
jury 9 — protect every human being underhis jurisdiction from op- 
pression of every kind, — andtosecure to all the exclusive, unmo- 
lested enjoyment of the fruit of their own labour, skill and indus- 
try. All these things, with others incidentally or necessarily con- 
nected with them, must he do, with all the sincerity, ability, 
perseverance, and patience obtainable in our present imperfect 
state. And if the magistrate is bound to do these things, sub- 
jects are bound not only to obey, but also to sustain him in his 
administration. But if he refuse to do these things, so far as that 
refusal goes, they are bound to petition, remonstrate, and testi- 
fy against the evil; and all these measures having failed, to use 
all their lawful power, that may be lawfully exercised, for his 
removal, and for the appointment of another that will obey the 
law. If, however, the people choose and support such a ma- 
gistrate, divine power only is adequate to the removal of an 
evil so monstrous. 

The doctrine of this section, though necessarily inferred from 
the preceding sections, is also proved from the first table of 
the law, as well as from the expositions of that table dispersed 
throughout the scriptures. Lev. xxiv. 16; 2 Kings xviii. 4; 
xxiii.; Neh. xiii. 17 — 22, and elsewhere. Here one of two 
things devolves upon those who deny that the magistrate is 
bound to suppress, if need be, with civil pains, all avowed athe- 
ism and blasphemy, all public idolatry or image worship, and 
all public breaches of the Sabbath: first, they must prove that 
the magistrate is not bound to yield, nor enforce upon his sub- 
jects an external obedience to the ten commandments; or, 
second, they must prove that magistrates are not bound to yield, 
nor enforce upon their subjects obedience to the first four of 
the ten commandments. We assert that both magistrates and 
subjects are bound by both tables of the law, as here stated. 
This, both wings of Satan's army, popery and infidelity, deny. 
Here is the turning point between the king of Zion and his ene- 
mies. The enemies of Christ have struggled from the beginning 
of the world to maintain the negative. The witnesses of Christ 

sists in a denial of some of the essential doctrines of Christianity, publicly 
avowed and distinctly maintained; such heresy as is clearly condemned by 
the moral law. But more of this in the sequel. 



28 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

have prophesied in sackcloth in favour of the affirmative. To 
maintain the negative, Rome has imbrued her hands in the blood 
of sixty millions of the human race, who surrendered their lives 
to maintain the affirmative. The Roman beast, the fourth ter- 
rible monarchy described by Daniel, instigated by Satan, 
crouched down and took upon his back the apostate church, 
the scarlet coloured woman, which John saw, and for more than 
a thousand years, his ten horns, the modern kingdoms of Eu- 
rope, have been the pliant tools of this apostate church, as her 
will has been expressed through the human god, as he blas- 
phemously claims to be, who sits in the pagan temple of Rome 
under the assumed character of our Lord's vicegerent on earth. 
The ten horns must continue to be ridden by this strumpet 
till they obey and force upon their subjects external obedience 
to the moral law. When the witnesses of Christ obtained a 
partial victory over the pope, Satan changed his mode of attack. 
Seeing that some of the magistrates were disposed again to 
claim the power which they had treacherously given to Rome, 
he persuaded Henry VIII. of England, and his successors, not 
only to claim the right of administering the law independent 
of Rome, as it is applicable to the external order of society, but 
also to step into the house of God, the peculiar kingdom of 
Christ, and claim dominion there! This new aggression was 
resisted; the blood of the witnesses again flowed for the rights 
of Christ's crown and kingdom. In this trying time God en- 
abled his witnesses, after a hundred years' struggle, to declare 
their testimony by giving to the world, through many prayers 
and tears, and much labour, — -The Westminster Confession, 
which many of them were honoured to seal with their blood. 
In this country we have got fairly back upon the old field of 
battle. Here, there is no danger, till popery obtain the as- 
cendency, that the magistrate will interfere in the internal 
affairs of the church. The question then with us, is purely 
this, Shall the magistrate obey or disobey the ten command- 
ments? Or, in other words, Shall he prohibit a violation of the 
law of nature, in any and every form of religion, under which 
infidelity may seek concealment? Papists and infidels with 
one voice say, No. We assert the affirmative. Again; Is God 
Lord of the conscience, or is man the Lord of his own con- 
science? This age declares that man is the Lord of his own 
conscience, that he may be tolerated with a conscience that not 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 29 

only necessarily invades the rights of others, as every violation 
of natural law must do, but may also make himself independent 
of God, because his conscience dictates disobedience to God, 
who is the Lord of conscience! Will these men tell us what 
they mean by the rights of man ? Has man a right to renounce 
his Maker? or the authority of his Lawgiver? or violate the 
social law of nature which God has given for the good of his 
creature man? We do not design to permit any evasion of 
this point. It is the corner stone of all that we have advanced, 
or intend to advance respecting the magistrate's power circa 
sacra; and though our adversaries may be able to demolish 
some parts of our superstructure, (for we claim no infallibility 
of reasoning,) yet they have accomplished nothing, till this 
foundation be removed. We call upon them to prove, by the 
law of nature, or by God's holy word, that magistrates are not 
bound to obey and enforce an external conformity to the ten 
commandments. Until this be done, nothing is done to pur- 
pose. Either God or the people are the original source of 
power. Either magistracy as to its origin is a divine or human 
institution. Either divine or human will is the law of social 
intercourse. If you assert the latter, you declare man inde^ 
pendent of his Maker; a heresy which ought to be punished by 
the magistrate. If you admit the former, as all but atheists will, 
then where has God declared the law of man's social relations? 
If not in the ten commandments, where? If magistrates claim 
divine authority to suppress theft, as all except atheists do, 
where did they obtain that authority, or the knowledge of it? 
If not in the ten commandments, where? If they have autho- 
rity to enforce the second and not the first table of the law, 
where did they obtain such authority? Show us from the 
scriptures, or right reason, the magistrate's warrant to select 
one table of the law and reject the other? " He that keepeth 
the whole law, and yet oflendeth in one point, is guilty of all." 
Show us the book, or chapter, or verse, in natural or revealed 
law, that restricts the administration of the first table to the 
church in respect to external conformity, or that releases the 
magistrate in his official character and administration from the 
obligation of external obedience to the first table. The Anti- 
christian civil powers, from the beginning of the world, and 
in later ages in conjunction with Romanism, have frequently 
deluged the world in blood in their vain and impotent attempts 

3* 



30 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

to break off from their necks the yoke of the first table; but 
they never have succeeded, they never can succeed in removing 
this yoke. There it remains, firm and immutable as the being 
and throne of God. In the absence of all evidence to prove 
their independence of God, they have vented their cruel rage 
against the witnesses for the government, the law and the ho- 
nour of God. Hence the Pope, and the ten horns who have 
given him their power, know that either they or protestant- 
ism and an open Bible must perish. They sneer with ineffable 
contempt upon the sickly sentimentality of pseudo proteslants, 
who are afraid to execute God's law. They know that obedi- 
ence to this law is the strong-hold, the cnly refuge of protes- 
tantism. They know that the absence of any direct public re- 
cognition of the protestant religion in the constitution of these 
United States renders our people an easy prey to Rome. They 
know that the struggle is for existence; that it can only termi- 
nate by the total annihilation of one of the parties. Revelation 
tells us which party must fall; and that its fall will be effect- 
ed instrumentally by national obedience to the first as well as 
the second table of the law. 

We have been the more minute here, because all that we 
have written must stand or fall with the doctrine here advanced. 
Yet we look with no friendly eye upon any connexion of church 
and state, that has ever yet been established. The Episcopal 
hierarchy and the Erastian encroachments of Great Britain, have 
indirectly played into the hands of Rome. Men have resorted 
to infidelity instead of God's law, as the only mode of escape 
from its overshadowing despotism. No sooner delivered from 
the tyranny of Rome, than they found their chains again rivet- 
ted by institutions professedly protestant. These facts, ope- 
rating upon corrupt nature, led men to conclude that God's law 
must itself be tyrannical, or surely it could not lead to oppres- 
sion in every form of its administration, forgetting that the law 
was trampled down by both protestant and popish governments; 
that it was the transgression of the law, in both instances, that 
produced these bitter fruits. We seem to forget that the British 
government was, and is still, one of the ten horns; that the 
United States has identified herself with these ten horns by 
substituting human will in the place of divine law, as the basis 
of civil government. Thiswill clearly appear in our examina- 
tion of the constitution. 

5. How far is the civil government required to obey and 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 31 

execute the moral law, as it is connected with our Lord's ad- 
ministration of the covenant of grace? We have hitherto only 
considered the obligation of national obedience to the law as 
administered by our Lord, in its natural state, that is, irrespec- 
tive of the covenant of grace. In our present view of the law, 
the magistrate has no direct concern, for many reasons, which 
might be adduced: he is no ruler, and has no jurisdiction in the 
house of God; consequently, he cannot restrain, or in any man- 
ner hinder the free discussion of theological questions, so long 
as the contending parties keep within the limits of the law in 
its natural state. He can neither dispense nor appoint others 
to dispense gospel ordinances, nor interfere in any manner with 
the internal government of the church, nor establish by law 
any particular creed or mode of worship. One fact alone is suf- 
ficient to prove the truth of this, namely, the Lord Jesus Christ 
has appointed others to do all these things. But the magistrate 
of a Christian people has indirectly much to do with the church, 
as we have already seen. He must recognise her existence, 
secure her independence in her own sphere, as she is a public 
body of men under his jurisdiction. The church, in common 
with the magistrate, requires an external obedience to the law. 
But she goes much farther; she explains its spirituality, en- 
forces its claims upon the conscience, exhibits the only remedy 
for transgression, the only means by which the law can be 
properly obeyed. Thus she instrumentally communicates a 
vital principle necessary to secure any good degree of outward 
obedience to the lawful commands of the magistrate. He is 
therefore to regard the church as a co-worker with him for the 
good of his subjects, as bringing to his aid the strongest gua- 
rantee known to the world for the maintenance of his authority, 
and for that obedience to law which is as essential to national 
as to individual prosperity. He is therefore bound to give the 
church such temporal support, equitably raised, as may be ne- 
cessary; or at least, to give her all legal facilities requisite for 
acquiring and holding and disbursing so much of the property 
of the world as may be really necessary for her general exten- 
sion and maintenance in all parts of his dominions, that she 
may not be hindered in the accomplishment of her divine mis- 
sion, 1 Kings v.; 2 Chron. xxxi. 11. But in the execution of 
this part of his office he must treat all denominations on the 
principles of equality, who hold and teach obedience to the 



32 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

law of nature, excluding and suppressing all transgressors of 
that law, while he is careful never to lay burdens upon one 
party for the benefit of another. This subject, however, must be 
resumed in considering the doctrine inculcated in the Westmin- 
ster Confession, when we shall attempt at least to be understood. 
But it may be inquired, Would not the execution of the mo- 
ral law by the magistrate infringe upon liberty of conscience? 
We answer unhesitatingly, No. It would indeed infringe upon 
a prevalent and shining fallacy which has been incorporated into 
several of the state constitutions, namely: " That every man has 
the right to worship God according to the dictates of his own 
conscience." This is saying, that papists may burn our Bibles, 
may take our lives, because the dictates of their conscience lead 
them to judge that by doing so they are doing God service. 
Burning heretics is an act of faith. In the reign of Charles II. 
and James I. this kind of liberty of conscience was the specious 
pretext for the introduction of Popery. With what success 
the same plea is now urged in our own country, let the history 
of the times attest. It has been well observed that there is but 
a single step between the sublime and ridiculous, so there is but 
a single step between liberty and despotism. The papists found 
their despotism upon the church's supposed liberty of con- 
science, and right of supremacy over mankind, to crush all li- 
berty.* We republicans found our despotism upon each indi- 
vidual's supposed liberty of conscience and right of supremacy 

* When we reflect upon the history of Romanism, its blasphemous as- 
sumption of divine prerogatives, its interference with magistrates, and claim 
of supremacy over them; its horrid inquisition] its total annihilation of liberty 
of conscience, to say nothing of its idolatry and superstition, and that Ame- 
ricans with the light of God's word and the experience of a thousand years 
before them, should, under the influence of the lie, that " every man has the 
right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience," not 
only welcome hordes of Rome's vassals to their shores, not only give their 
idolatry protection, not only support their paupers, made such by the unholy 
exactions of an impious priesthood, not only give them political power, and 
civil offices, not only give them money to build idolatrous temples, not only 
intrust their children to their education and moral training, not only permit 
themselves to be shot down like dogs by these Romanists merely for exercising 
the right of meeting and free discussion; but also permit them to pluck God's 
holy word from the eager grasp of their defenceless children, and burn it be- 
fore their eyes, with every possible mark of public infamy, I fear that God 
has in a great measure ceased to remember my native land in mercy. "How 
long, O Lord!" When shall this stupidity, this maniac idiocy have an end? 
From the heart I pity my silly countrymen. If ye still have eyes, look at 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 33 

over himself. In the one case men become slaves to the lusts 
of their superiors, in the other to their own. In both cases the 
practical result is the same, with this difference only, in the 
latter case we enjoy the poor consolation of knowing that we 
have been wholly the authors of our own ruin. The truth is, 
God, who alone is Lord of the conscience, has bound it by his 
own law. We therefore, humbly suggest, whether it would 
not come much nearer the truth to say, "All men possess the right 
in the sight of God to worship Him according to the directions of his 
word; and in the sight of men the right to judge for themselves 
what is the peculiar, distinctive faith or mode of worship which 
the word requires ? But men have not the right, either in the 
sight of God or men, to teach any system of faith, or maintain 
any mode of worship which infringes upon the law of nature. 
Men may not, under the plea either of liberty or despotism, 
trample down the immutable, eternal law of the universe. 
Hence it is inferred that magistrates are bound to restrain, and, 
if need be, punish the evils enumerated in the fourth particular; 
that the people are bound to elect such as will faithfully exe- 
cute the law. If they elect men who persist in violating the 
law, they become the greater transgressors themselves. If the 
constitution and laws of a professedly Christian country make 
no provision for enforcing this supreme law, it is crime to 

Rome's regard for the rights of conscience, in her treatment of your protes- 
tant brethren in Switzerland in the year 1844: — 

"The priests, so skilful in observing after their own way the maxim, f Re- 
deem the time,' (literally, 'Redeem the opportunity,') have not failed to 
take advantage of the massacre of Trient, for increasing their influence, and 
opposing the entrance of protestantism into Valais. In discussing the basis 
of a new constitution for this canton, which they have the folly of making 
at a moment of high excitement, when it can only be a work of passion; an 
article was put to the vote, which ordains that the Roman catholic religion, 
solely, has a public worship in the country. Still, this appeared too liberal: it 
was proposed to amend by striking out the word public, and the amendment 
was carried by a majority of votes. Thus, no worship, not even private, can 
be celebrated in this canton by protestants ; only they are pleased to allow 
that visits to the sick do not constitute a worship. The minority, urged in 
opposition, the tolerance exercised toward Roman catholics in the protestant 
cantons, and the necessity of a worship of some kind for the protestants of 
Valais. The reply to the first argument was, that protestantism was incon- 
sistent with itself, while Roman Catholicism is consistent, in suffering no other 
communion to occupy a place beside it; and, as to the second, the presence 
of a priest is necessary to the Roman catholic, according to the principles of 
the Roman church, while that of a minister is not so to the protestant accord- 
ing to the principles of the reformed church." — Foreign Correspondence of 
the Presbyterian under date of Sept. 3, 1844. 



34 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

yield a voluntary obedience, or give to them the least degree 
of favourable countenance in this evil. Such a government is 
essentially atheistical, and will speedily produce a nation of in- 
fidels, constantly growing worse, till it fall by the weight of its 
own essential depravity, and probably expire in the blood of 
its own subjects. 

6. But the question arises, may not the law which we have 
cited, or at least some parts of it, be Jewish or ceremonial? or, 
in other words, are we quite sure that this law is binding under 
the New Testament dispensation? It is generally conceded 
by all who bow to the authority of divine revelation, that 
whatever was not typical and local in the Jewish economy is 
moral, and therefore of universal and perpetual obligation. At 
least, we know of no sect, avowedly Christian, who do not ac- 
knowledge the law of the ten commandments to be moral. To 
this law we appeal, we claim nothing from magistrates, beyond 
the external enforcement of this law; nothing from the people in 
their social and civil relations beyond obedience to this law. The 
transgression of this law is as heinous now as it was in the days 
of Moses, and is attended with increased aggravations of guilt. 
Is a belief in the being of God less necessary to us than it was 
to the Jews? Then the "fool " only dared to say in his heart, 
"no God;" then the magistrate, in vindication of the law, would 
have laid hands on him, had he declared his atheism, and blas- 
phemy publicly, Lev. xxiv. 11 — 16, 23. If the Lord our God 
be "the same yesterday, to-day and for ever," is not idolatry 
and image worship the same offence now that it ever was? 
Then, the magistrate restrained and punished these daring 
crimes. Deut. vii. 5; 2 Kings xxiii. 4 — 15. If a seventh por- 
tion of man's time was then necessary to be devoted exclu- 
sively to rest from ordinary labour, the public and private wor- 
ship of God, and works of necessity and mercy, is it less so 
now? If the magistrate was then bound to punish the public 
transgressors of this law, why not now? See Neh. xiii. 15 — 
22. We omit any reference here to the second table of the 
law, which refers more directly to the duties which men owe 
to each other, than to the duties which they owe to God. But 
here it will be inquired, Do you contend for the infliction of the 
very same penalties that then were inflicted ? So far as may be 
necessary for the suppression of these crimes, we certainly do. 
There was then a local circumstance which does not now exist. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 35 

For the confirmation of the truth of divine revelation and the 
perfect establishment of the law, examples of punishment were 
more necessary then than now, that the people might see that the 
threatened penalties of the divine law were realities. Now the 
law is sufficiently established in Christian nations to leave the 
people utterly inexcusable for their crimes. Examples are not 
needed, for " if they believe not Moses and the prophets, they 
would not believe, though one should rise from the dead." 
We conclude then that the magistrate is bound to suppress and 
eradicate from the land these crimes when publicly commit- 
ted, at all hazards; and if, through the obstinacy or wickedness 
of man, it may become necessary, the full penalty of the law 
must be inflicted. Call this popery, bigotry, tyranny, perse- 
cution, or any other hard names you please, we leave you to set- 
tle the controversy with him whose law you thus despise. 
We leave you to settle not only your transgressions of the law 
but also your blasphemous revilings, with the Lawgiver him- 
self, not with a mortal man like yourselves. 

But why is it that men quarrel with the first table of the 
law, while they insist that magistrates shall enforce the second? 
Because they are depraved. They are jealous of their own 
rights, but reckless of God's. In nothing, perhaps, does the 
moral rottenness of men appear more, than in this. They are 
ever ready to exact things equal from others, while, if grace 
prevent not, they weigh the earth down with their oppression 
of others. Their ferocity in oppression is limited only by the 
extent of their power. What a world would this be with- 
out the restraints of God's grace and providence! Who 
could dwell on the earth if men in power were not restrained 
in some measure by his righteous law. If, then, men manifest 
their depravity in nothing, more than in their reckless disre- 
gard of the rights of their equals, notwithstanding all the re- 
straints of the second table of the law enforced by magistrates, 
who can fathom the deep and awful depravity which they ma- 
nifest not only by their disregard of the rights and honour of 
God, but also by their obstinate refusal to bind magistrates by 
the first table of the law, or clothe them with power to en- 
force its claims upon their subjects? If our lusts may be gra- 
tified, God may be excluded from the government of the world. 

But it may be inquired, are men to be compelled to embrace 
any religious creed by the power of the civil magistrate, or by 



36 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

any human power, or has God given either to civil or eccle- 
siastical rulers any power to impose upon men the profession or 
practice of the true religion ? We unhesitatingly answer, No. 
The magistrate's power extends to the external conduct of men, 
as that conduct bears upon the rights of others. It is one 
thing to prohibit men from publishing atheism, and quite ano- 
ther to compel them to believe in the being of God. It is one 
thing to prevent men from disturbing the public, on the sab- 
bath, and quite another to compel them to keep it holy. It is 
one thing to prohibit men from disturbing the outward peace of 
thechurch,and quite another to compel them to join it. It is one 
thing to compel men to yield an external conformity to the light 
of nature, and quite another to compel them to make, profess, 
and support any distinctive religious creed or form of worship. 
The former things belong to the magistrate, not the latter. In 
regard to the latter, God has reserved the jurisdiction to himself. 
Ecclesiastical rulers have power to compel nothing in the way 
of civil pains and penalties. In regard to religious coercion, 
we adopt the language of another, who goes farther than we 
can in maintaining the magistrate's power circa sacra. "The 
propagation of religion cannot be accomplished by the coer- 
cive power of the civil magistrate. Against all attempts to pro- 
mote religion by force we have protested, and we regard it as 
absurd as it is impolitic to attempt to compel men to cherish 
any religious principles, or practise any religious duty."* To 
this, I add, in the language of the apostle, "For though we walk 
in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh; for the weapons of our 
warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God, to the pulling 
down of strong holds," &c. 2 Cor. x. 3, 4. The word and or- 
dinances of Christ are the only legitimate means to be used for 
the propagation of true religion. Popish ceremonies orany other 
human inventions are as unauthorized as useless, and perhaps 
more pernicious to the cause of true religion, than even coer- 
cive measures of the magistrate, because more likely to deceive, 
and more readily acquiesced in. * Go, preach the gospel," &c, 
is the commission of Christ to his ministers. "For it hath 
pleased God by the foolishness of preaching" and not by the 
sword of magistrates, " to save them that believe." 

7. It is alleged that the mild spirit of the gospel, in opposi- 
tion to the ancient economy, is inconsistent with all sanguinary, 

* Reviewer Reviewed by Rev. John Huston, p. 13. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 37 

or even severe punishments, as though the rectitude, govern- 
ment, or gospel of God could change their essential moral cha- 
racter. The fifth chapter of Matthew is cited with other simi- 
lar portions of the New Testament, and perverted to the sup- 
port of many wicked absurdities. The twenty-first and twen- 
tv-second verses are quoted as good authority for magistrates 
to abolish the punishment of death for deliberate homicide. 
But this passage leaves the law as it was from the beginning, 
which is a strong confirmation of its perpetual obligation. God 
had said, "Thou shalt not kill." The tradition of the Jewish 
elders had made this gloss upon it, "Whosoever shall kill shall 
be in danger of the judgment;"* by which they intended that 
nothing but actual murder was prohibited, — that those sins 
which lead to it were venial. Our Lord assures them that not 
only shall actual murder be punished with death by magistrates, 
as Moses wrote, but whosoever shall indulge in causeless an- 
ger shall be in danger of divine judgment. He gave no inti- 
mation that the old law was to be repealed, which runs thus: 
"Whosoever killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to 
death by the mouth of witnesses; but one witness shall not tes- 
tify against any person to cause him to die. (Two witnesses are 
required, Deut. xvii. 6.) Moreover, ye shall take no satisfac- 
tion for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death [killing;] 
but he shall be surely put to death." Num. xxxv. 30, 31. If 
the sixth commandment be moral, then is this; for it relates to 
the same subject. If this and similar passages be not still bind- 
ing, then the law prohibiting murder has no penalty annexed; 
and men may kill each other in their private quarrels, when- 
ever they please, as many are now doing in this country. We 
have clubs of infidels in most of the cities in the United States, 
frequently meeting, passing resolutions highly denunciatory of 
this divine law, besieging the legislatures of many states with 
their memorials, and thus helping on the work of shedding hu- 
man blood, by which the land is already fearfully polluted. We 
entreat these men to pause in their work of death, if they regard 
themselves or their country. They have already polluted the 
public mind to such an extent that, in many places, it is scarcely 
possible to procure a conviction for atrocious murder, even when 
the evidence of guilt in the case is clear and indisputable. And 
this fact is urged as an argument for the abolition of a divine law ! 

* See Dr. Scott's, or any other respectable Commentary. 
4 



38 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

These men denounce the law as (i barbarous," "unchristian," 
and I know not what opprobrious epithets can be found in our 
language, which are not applied to it. The law quoted above 
from Numbers, say they, is Jewish. Well, by what process of 
reasoning can they show that it was not then as barbarous as it 
is now? Suppose they could prove that this law has been done 
away (which they cannot) still they could not prove it " bar- 
barous," without implying a charge against God which a 
Christian may well shudder to name. In like manner, the pro- 
hibition of private revenge, Matt. v. 38 — 44, and elsewhere, is 
perverted into an argument against the administration of pub* 
lie justice. But who does not see that this prohibition renders 
punishment by magistrates the more necessary? God has ap- 
pointed rulers, that private persons may not attempt to take the 
law into their own hand, and we voluntarily yield obedience 
to them on the ground of their covenant obligation to protect 
us in the quiet and secure enjoyment of our rights. 

8. But does the divine law prohibit slavery as it exists in 
the United States? We answer in the affirmative. But the 
advocates of this atrocious crime, which tramples down alike 
the claims of God and human nature, tell us the Bible sustains 
slavery, referring with great apparent confidence to the twenty- 
fifth chapter of Leviticus. Thus the Jewish law, which has 
been repealed, when it requires the punishment of murder, is 
in full force to sustain slavery! How very convenient to dismiss 
and call up a law as it condemns or justifies our lusts ! But if the 
Bible sustain such slavery as exists in the United States, it never 
came from God: God is just. Revelation is God's exposition 
of the law of nature, together with a remedy for the transgres- 
sion of that law. To suppose that such a Book sustains or 
ever did sustain any degree of injustice, or moral evil, is blas- 
phemously to suppose that God is not only the author of sin, but 
also the transgressor of his own law, which requires men to do no 
evil to their fellow men, and to do to others as they would 
that others should do to them. Many able productions have 
recently appeared which fully vindicate the Bible from the 
charge of sustaining slavery, which renders it the less necessary 
to enter formally upon the discussion of the question here. 
However, for the satisfaction of the reader, the following things 
may be observed, respecting Lev. xxv., as it bears upon the 
question before us: 1. The jubilee occurred every fifty years, 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 39 

in which "liberty was proclaimed throughout all the land unto 
all the inhabitants thereof." Every man whose possession had 
been sold for debt was to return to his possession, and every 
servant or bond-servant, (the same Hebrew word being ren- 
dered both servant and bond-servant,) was to return to his 
family, v. 10. 2. The land of the Jews could never be sold (v. 
23,) nor could any dwelling-place among them be obtained by 
a foreigner except in a house in a walled city, (v. 29, 30,) or as 
a servant in some Jewish family. To enjoy the privileges of 
the Jewish church the Gibeonites were compelled to become 
servants. 3. The tabernacle, and afterwards the temple, were 
then the only house of prayer for all nations, and the only way 
in which the true God could be worshipped. 4. All male ser- 
vants must be circumcised, Gen. xvii. 10, 15; Josh. v. 2, 10; 
must go up to the tabernacle, afterwards the temple, three times 
a year, Ex. xxiii. 15, 20. Both male and female servants were 
required to eat the passover, Ex. xii. 43, 44; but the males 
must first be circumcised, v. 45; all were required to keep the 
Sabbath day holy, Ex. xx. 9, 10. 5. Jewish and heathen ser- 
vants were placed on a perfect equality: a Hebrew brother in 
bondage was as a hired servant and a sojourner, v. 40, under 
the same law as the stranger, Ex. xii. 49. 6. The words buy and 
sell, used in this chapter, express the ordinary voluntary contract 
of one person to serve another for a specified time and reward* 
which was at its expiration sometimes renewed, Ex. xxi. 6. 7. One 
Jew could not hire another, unless the poverty of the one hired 
rendered it necessary; it being the design of the law, that every 
Jew should cultivate his own inheritance, and when hired out 
must return to it at the jubilee, v. 39, 40. 8. The Jews could 
hire heathens not of a third person, nor against their will, but 
of themselves or their families, at any time, "for ever," 
throughout their generations, without regard to their poverty 
or wealth, ver. 44 — 46; but they must in every instance be 
voluntary converts to the true religion. 9. Strangers or hea- 
then converts could hire poor Hebrews, equally with the native 
born Hebrew, ver. 47. 10. Jewish servants could be redeemed 
at any time, ver. 48 — 54; and all Jewish servants or converts 
from heathenism went out at the jubilee. 11. These servants 
enjoyed all the privileges of the children of Jewish families, 
if we allow Paul, brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, and speak- 
ing by inspiration, to be good authority— « Now I say, that the 



40 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, 
though he be Lord of all," Gal. iv. 1. 12. If they refused to 
acknowledge the true religion and observe its rites, they -eould 
not reside in the country, Gen. xvii. 13, 14; Ex. xxiii. 9; and 
they could not be compelled to make a profession of the true re- 
ligion against their will, Ex. xxii. 21, nor be admitted to its pri- 
vileges without voluntarily submitting to circumcision, Ex. xii. 
45. 13. If one of these servants fled, he could not be returned to 
his master, nor oppressed, but might dwell in any of the walled 
cities, or leave the country, Deut. xxiii. 15, 16. 

From these facts it is perfectly evident that the servitude of 
the Jews, as it has been called, was equal and just, and merci- 
ful;, in every way beneficial to the servant. Poor slave-holders! 
if this be the foundation on which you rest for a justification of 
your robbery of God and man, you are indeed poor! You are 
not to be reviled and mocked, but pitied. 

But the New Testament is also said to sustain slavery. It 
is alleged that slave-holders were admitted to the privileges of 
the primitive church, because Paul points out the duty of both 
masters and slaves, as members of the church. But let it be 
observed that Paul commands masters to give their servants 
those things which are just and equal. If holding and sell- 
ing men, women and children as property, — if overworking, 
maiming, mangling with whips, teeth of dogs, hot irons, and rifle 
balls, their bodies, — if the separation of husbands and wives, 
parents and children, prostitution — bastardy, selling one's own 
children into remediless bondage,— if punishing men with 
death for teaching the poor slave the words of eternal life, or 
even the alphabet of his mother tongue, be things just and equal ! 
then it may be that the New Testament sustains slavery! — not 
otherwise. 

" I have examined no less than twenty thousand pages of oc- 
tavos and quartos, to ascertain one single fact: — to know 
whether Grecian or Roman slavery extended to, and existed 
in the provinces of the Roman Empire, in which the churches 
were located, to which these regulations were given. Six of 
Paul's epistles were written to churches in Europe, viz: one to 
Rome, two to Corinth, two to Thessalonica, and one to Philippi. 
The term master of a servant does not occur in all these epistles. 
Masters were not recognised as members of any of these 
churches. Some of these epistles were long and minute, espe- 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 41 ' 

cially the one to Rome and the two to Corinth; large cities, in 
which slaves were as thick as black-birds in southern swamps. 
Now if the apostle took slaveholders into these churches, is it 
not strange that we find none in the churches; that not a word 
was addressed to them? The term 'servants' occurs once, 
and but once, and then in this wise: ' Art thou called, being a 
servant? care not for it; but if thou mayest be made free, use it 
rather. For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is 
the Lord's free man: likewise also he that is called, being free, 
is Christ's servant. Ye are bought with a price, be not ye 

THE SERVANTS OF MEN.' 1 Cor. vii. 21, 23."* 

The directions to masters and servants are found in those 
epistles which were addressed to the churches located in the 
provinces of Asia Minor, where neither Roman nor Grecian 
slavery existed. These were free provinces of the Roman 
Empire: and if slavery did not exist in the country, how did it 
find its way into the church? It devolves upon slaveholders 
and their apologists to prove that slavery existed in these pro- 
vinces at the time the apostle wrote, before they undertake to 
apply his directions to their system of slavery. To this they 
have been challenged by other and more able writers. The 
United States, like the Roman, is a slaveholding empire, and 
like the Roman, has also its free states. But Onesimus was a 
slave! This is denied, and we challenge the proof. That he 
was a servant of Philemon, by his own voluntary act, or per- 
haps a younger natural brother, over whom Philemon had a 
certain dominion by the law of primogeniture, or by Onesimus' 
minority, the father being deceased, is readily admitted. Cal- 
met, a Romanist, who is justly claimed by slaveholders, tells us 
that when Onesimus returned to Philemon with Paul's epistle, 
the latter received him, " not only as a faithful servant, but as 
a brother and a friend; and after a little time sent him back to 
Rome, that he might continue his services to Paul, in his pri- 
son. From this time Onesimus' employment was in the mi- 
nistry of the gospel. The apostolical constitutions report, that 
Paul made him bishop of Berea, in Macedonia. The martyr- 
ologies call him apostle, and say he ended his life by martyr- 
dom ;"-)- — some little difference, truly, between a bishop and a 
southern slave. We give very little credit, however, to Cal- 

* Rev. Edward Smith, 
t Robinson's Calmet on the word Onesimus. 
4* 



i 



42 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

met's authorities, but let our opponents produce as good to prove 
that Onesimus was a slave. 

We may safely, without any breach of charity, with all so- 
briety of mind, and with the most scrupulous and tender regard 
for the rights of slaveholders and the character of their advo- 
cates and apologists, assert, that the Bible, so far from giving 
the least countenance to slavery,brands it with an indelible mark 
of infamy, as one of the foulest crimes which go to fill up the 
catalogue of human guilt. The law of God denounces death 
to every man that either steals, holds, or sells a slave. " He 
that stealetk a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, 
he shall surely be put to death," Ex. xxi. 16. Joseph was sold 
to the Ishmaelites, Gen. xxxvii. 2S. Their purchase of him 
he calls man-stealing: " I was stolen away out of the land of the 
Hebrews,'' Gen. xi. 15. To buy a man as property is stealing 
him. Hence our translators render the Greek word which 
denotes slave dealers, by the term men-stealers, 1 Tim. i. 10. 
We shall only add here, that the Greek word properly denoting 
slave or slaves is not in the Bible.* Nor is the Greek word which 
denotes slave dealer to be found, except in 1 Tim. i. 10. The 
Septuagint also renders the Hebrew word, Lev. xxv., which is 
rendered servants and bond-men, by the Greek word oixetat, 
literally, household, or family servants. But the only Greek 
word which properly denotes slave, is avSpartoSov, literally, a 
slave. So avSp&7to8ift!$, 1 Tim. i. 10, denotes, one who steals men 
to make them slaves, or sell them into slavery; one who by deceit 
reduces free men to slavery. For the punishment of such per- 
sons, and their advocates and apologists, is the law made. The 
merchants of the earth who have their merchandise in the en- 
slaved bodies and souls of men, (Rev. xviii. 13,) are enume- 
rated among those who were made rich by the prevalence of 
Romanism, or rather the spirit of Romanism, which consists 
in making the will of man, instead of the law of God, the su- 
preme law to man. These merchants in the enslaved bodies 
and souls of men join in the general wailing, and lamentation, 
and weeping, over fallen Rome, — "Alas, alas! that great city! 
In one hour so great riches is come to naught! " From this 
it seems that slavery and the Romish Antichrist are to be co- 
extensive in their duration; and, finally, to fall under such 
judgments as probably the world never saw. Indeed the only 

* Parkhurst tells us that it occurs in 2 Maccabees vii. 5. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 4a 

material difference between popery and slavery is this: the 
one begins its usurpation upon the body, and terminates upon 
the soul; the other first enslaves the soul, but terminates upon 
the body; both agree in ultimately effecting the mutual and 
everlasting destruction of both soul and body. 

9. But does not the doctrine advanced in the third particu- 
lar amount to treason? No. The constitution does not com- 
pel us to vote or hold office. If in any case it should do so, suf- 
fering is preferable to sin. If we are willing to make a volun- 
tary surrender of these privileges for conscience' sake, it will 
not compel us to swear allegiance. Besides, it provides for its 
own amendment. If so, it confers upon the citizen the right 
to point out its sinful provisions to the nation, and to use all 
lawful means for their removal. But we may, safely, and 
should, go farther than this. We should declare its sinful pro- 
visions morally null from the beginning, and that every man 
who yields obedience to these provisions does so at the peril 
of his soul. He can only be in subjection, in a passive way, 
from necessity; for it is impossible that any sinful law or 
obligation can be valid; if we say yes, we say that Herod was 
right in killing John. Suppose a number of persons should 
associate themselves under an obligation to steal and sell every 
human being that could be brought under their power; suppose 
another class of men, who were opposed to such measures, yet 
through fear of the former class, or of some other enemy, 
against whom they needed the assistance of the former class, 
this other class should enter into an obligation with the former 
to use their influence and power to help them steal and 
hold and sell men, the former, as a quid pro quo entering into 
an obligation with the latter to assist them in carrying on law- 
ful business and in repelling foreign aggression, both parties 
agreeing that they will have nothing to do with religion, or 
the law of God. Do any suppose that such obligations can be 
binding upon the parties either in the sight of God or men? 
Are we then to be told that such obligations can bind the suc- 
cessors of these parties? If so, then men can associate and by 
a human decree of iniquity overturn the government of God. 
Such, however, is the constitution of the United States, in refe- 
rence to religion and slavery, as we shall see when we come 
directly to its consideration. We, the people of the United 
States, are these robbers! And the wisest and best statesmen 



44 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

among us say, if the bargain were to be made over again, they 
would not agree to it; but since it has been made, they are will- 
ing, Herod-like, to abide by the obligation, though innocent 
blood should continue to flow! And we, forsooth, are to be 
branded as traitors to our country, because we cannot consent 
to enter into an oath and covenant to renounce God our Saviour, 
for the worldly advantage of being connected with this band of 
men-stealers! If any think the government of their country, 
with such a moral character, a more suitable Saviour than the 
Lord Jesus Christ, let them take their choice. If they have more 
confidence in the advocacy of politicians who continue to per- 
petuate such a constitution, than they have in the advocacy of 
the Lord Jesus Christ, we say again, let them choose. There 
are some men who are unwilling to sell their God and Saviour 
for such a human government? There are others eager for the 
bargain: we say again, let them choose for themselves; but be 
pleased also to let us choose for ourselves. 

10. Does not the doctrine advanced in the fourth particular 
constitute the magistrate a judge in religious matters? When 
we plead the claims of God's law upon magistrates, we are 
immediately met with the objection, You make the magistrate 
a judge in religion, you require him to propagate religion by 
the sword, you seek to establish a state religion, and bury in 
one common ruin both civil liberty and the rights of conscience. 
If the half of these objections were true, they would not only 
overthrow our argument, but destroy divine revelation; for we 
are not permitted to suppose that God has given a law to men, 
which in its operation destroys the rights both of God and 
men. To make the church independent of the state, in exter- 
nals, has always produced the very evils which are falsely as- 
cribed to the magistrate's just authority in religion. Hence the 
admirable adaptation of our institutions to the designs of the pa- 
pacy. Romanists could not desire a better opportunity than we 
have given them. They laugh at us as the hunter at the silly 
ostrich. But we hope to show, that these objections are 
the offspring of ignorance or infidelity. Take this proposition, 
Over every thing relating to the external affairs of the church, con- 
sidered as a corporate body of men, constituting a component part 
of the social compact, and over all her acts of administration, so far 
as they have a bearing on the social rights of others, the magistrate 
has jurisdiction, is the competent judge of the legality of her action, 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 45 

and is bound to compel her, if necessary, to yield obedience to the 
law of nature. For two reasons — 1. The magistrate is the 
divinely appointed guardian of social rights in every supposable 
case: in this respect, he is the minister of God, the represen- 
tative of God. If he truly administer the divine law, God is 
with him in his official acts. " God standeth in the congrega- 
tion of the mighty, he judgeth among the gods," Ps. lxxxii. 1. 
Consequently, the transgressor exposes himself to the punish- 
ment of God and man. 2. Human depravity, which leads men 
to invade the rights of others, manifests itself under the form of 
religion, even that which is most pure, as readily as in any 
other shape, and frequently with more virulence and malignity 
than in any other form. Consequently, no man can be permit- 
ted to plead conscience for inflicting injury upon others, either 
in their reputation, lawful pursuits, property, or persons. 
Every human government must possess an ultimate judge of 
controversies respecting civil rights, from whose decision there 
can be no appeal in this world, and no violent disobedience by 
individuals. Passive subjection is due here,and must be yielded, 
even when the magistrate is known to be wrong. If the ma- 
gistrate become corrupt, the law provides a remedy. If the 
majority become too corrupt to apply the remedy, we must wait 
for the great Lawgiver, who will interpose in the right time 
and way. The magistrate is and must be the judge, and is ac- 
countable only to God and the laws of his country. To deny 
this, puts an effectual end to all government, and introduces 
anarchy, with its many-headed monsters and all its horrid pro- 
geny. Magistrates are supposed to be qualified for their high 
office, by suitable intellectual, legal and moral attainments: 
they are supposed to possess and act in the fear of God, know- 
ing their accountability. Hence, it is absolutely necessary to 
good government that they be men fearing God and hating 
covetousness. If the people appoint unqualified men, they be- 
tray their own liberties and provoke the divine anger. 

In regard to the internal concerns of the church, the magis- 
trate has no direct jurisdiction. He may not impose upon his 
subjects any distinctive creed or form of worship, nor interfere 
in any manner with the church's ordinances. But he may 
and is bound to compel her to abide by her own laws of out- 
ward administration, on the same principle that he may compel 
individuals to fulfil lawful contracts of any kind made in good 



46 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

faith. He is present in ecclesiastical assemblies by the law 
which he ad ministers, and may be personally present if he judge 
the public good so require; not to participate in the proceedings, 
but to support the law of social intercourse. In a disordered 
state of society, when religious factions are infringing upon the 
rights of each other, he may, and should, if he judge it would be 
conducive to the public interests, call an ecclesiastical assembly 
to settle their disputes in a lawful manner; leaving them to 
unite, or form separate ecclesiastical organizations, according as 
they may agree or disagree; and then compel the contending 
parties to abide by their own arrangements, taking order that 
all parties keep within the requirements of the law of nature. 
Here again the magistrate is judge. He must protect temporal 
interests and social rights, none the less because connected with 
religion. In regard to the internal affairs of the church, organ- 
izing congregations, election of church officers, ordination, dis- 
pensing the word and sacraments, admissions to communion, 
admonitions, rebukes, suspensions, excommunications, he can- 
not interfere. But after these things have been done by the 
church, he may inquire how far they affect the pecuniary and 
social interests of the parties; and how far the parties have kept 
or violated their voluntary obligations towards each other; and 
nullify or give validity to her acts, so far as they affect these 
interests, according as he may find those acts lawful or unlaw- 
ful. Nor does it alter the case, whether the dispute respect 
doctrine or discipline. The magistrate is supposed capable of 
judging of the legality of every covenant which men are per- 
mitted to make with each other, and also of the violation of 
the covenant, by any of the parties. If the covenant be unlaw- 
ful, he must abolish it; if lawful, confirm it, and punish the 
transgressor of covenant obligations so far as the covenant may 
have only an indirect or remote bearing on civil rights. Those 
who deny this doctrine should never resort to civil law to 
settle the claims of contending parties to church property, nor 
to redress any wrong done to character, or worldly interests, 
by the action of church courts. Whenever they do so, they 
acknowledge all for which we here contend.* Suppose a 
minister, suspended by an ecclesiastical court, rebel and con- 

* This doctrine is fully maintained by the decision of the Vice Chancellor 
of the fourth circuit, in the state of New York, published in the Evangelical 
Repository, January, 1845. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 47 

tinue the exercise of his ministry, the civil magistrate, can 
neither restore, nor silence him. So far the case is purely ec- 
clesiastical, the magistrate has no jurisdiction. Suppose a 
church court suspend one of its members on a charge calculated 
to destroy his reputation as a member of civil society, the ma- 
gistrate has no jurisdiction; he cannot review, reverse or affirm 
any decision of a church court. But so far as the excluded 
minister or member suffer temporal loss either in character or 
property, or so far as the rebellion of the excluded persons 
against the decisions of the church court defrauds the court or 
any persons adhering to it of either property or character, the 
magistrate may interfere. He is the guardian of the temporal 
and social rights of all his subjects. If the proceedings of the 
church court have been in conformity with its own acknow- 
ledged laws, which the state as in duty bound had recognised 
by permitting them to be established, the magistrate will give 
legal efficacy to its action so far as it involves property or re- 
putation. He will not, cannot inquire into its ecclesiastical 
bearing, but he will inquire into its temporal bearing. He 
will compel the church court as well as the individual to abide 
by their own covenant engagements with each other, so far as 
a violation of these engagements affect temporal interests. If 
the magistrate should decline an inquiry into the regularity 
and legality* of ecclesiastical proceedings in such cases, and 
confirm them merely because they have been done, it would 
convert church courts into irresponsible and tremendous en- 
gines of oppression; they might with impunity denude any of 
their members, merely for dislike, not only of their status in 
the church, but also of their reputation and property, and means 
of subsistence in the world. So on the other hand if he re- 
fused to give legal validity to the regular and lawful * acts of 
church courts so far as they affect both character and property, 
church government could not exist; all bequests or donations 
to religious and charitable objects might at any time be divert- 
ed from the purpose designed by the donors. It may not be 
amiss to observe here that when the majority of a church court 
alter their constitution, the minority adhering to it may obtain 
all the ecclesiastical, temporal and civil rights of the body, both 
in the sight of God and men, unless the constitution provide 

* The terms legality and lawful are here used in reference to the established 
laws of the church. 



48 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

for its own amendment, and also prescribe the manner in which 
amendments shall be made: then the amendment must be ef- 
fected in the regular or prescribed manner. If it contain no 
provision for its own amendment, and prescribe no manner 
in which amendments may be made, it must remain as it is, if 
a minority be found adhering to it; and those who dislike it 
must secede. The solemn covenants which men make with 
each other, being lawful in the matter of them, are to be treated 
neither as men of straw nor ropes of sand. The magistrate 
then must give to his subjects full liberty, security, and neces- 
sary support, in setting up and maintaining any distinctive 
mode of worship and form of ecclesiastical government, which 
they or any number of them may judge agreeable to the word 
of God; but he must also see that none of his subjects, under 
the plea of religion, transgress the law of nature, or invade the 
social and religious rights of others. Religion of some kind, 
brought within the restrictions just named, is essential to all 
of man's temporal interests, as well as his future felicity. To 
secure interests so vast to the human race, magistracy and 
the ministry have been ordained of God co-workers together, 
each in their divinely appointed sphere. In this sense the 
union of church and state is indissoluble. The union of soul 
and body is not more necessary to constitute a human being 
than is such a union of church and state to the constitution of 
society. The moral character of a nation is, and must be, both 
exhibited and formed by its form of government. The people 
are like the rulers, and cannot be otherwise for any considera- 
ble length of time. True religion can never flourish, nor long 
exist in any nation, where the magistracy disregard the great 
conservative principles here laid down. They are the only 
protection from anarchy on the one side and popery on the 
other. The reformers understood this. Hence we find these 
principles in all their confessions. The pope is this moment 
demanding from England, as a sine qua non of international 
correspondence, the removal of every legal disability out of 
the way of Rome's image worship, while all protestant wor- 
ship is beginning to be suppressed in Romish states. But who 
does not see that if statesmen would enforce the law of nature, 
it would extirpate Romanism at once. This, the British cove- 
nants bound that nation to do. But, alas, they have proved 
themselves covenant breakers, and liberty in Europe is fast 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 49 

losing the foothold it obtained by the Reformation. Grim 
and ghostly tyranny is again creeping from the dens to which 
it had been driven for a season, with its army of hyenas, snarl- 
ing and eagerly watching their opportunity to devour the little 
but gallant band who still rally round the genius of liberty, re- 
solved to perish in her last fortress. While this conflict is 
racing in Europe, we Americans, like a silly flock of sheep 
driven by wolves into the wilderness, no sooner cease to feel 
the teeth of our destroying enemies, than we invite them to 
come and herd among us till they shall again become sufficient- 
ly powerful to suck the blood from our veins. The little band 
who have hitherto stood by the law of their God and the rights 
of their fellow men, are becoming weary of resistance to the 
popular current; they are almost ready to bury in oblivion the 
purest, the truest, defence of Divine and human rights, next to 
the Bible, that has ever been given to the world, namely, the 
Westminster Confession. They have fallen asleep in this hour 
of darkness, while the means for slaying the witnesses of Christ, 
as Christ himself was formerly slain, are in active preparation. 
In a little time we may say to these witnesses, Sleep on now, 
seeing ye could not watch one hour with Christ. Whether 
they will escape as safely as did the sorrowing disciples, for lay- 
ing down the banner of Christ at the foot of the enemy, is not 
for man to say. Their light is certainly greater. When the 
witnesses of Christ are to be slain we need not look for fidelity 
in magistrates. We need not expect the magistracy of this 
country to enforce the law of nature, so long as they continue 
to be, as they have hitherto been, misled by the ministry. 
Protestants and abolitionists must be content to wear the chains 
which the bulk of the nation have forged for themselves. They 
have made " an agreement with death, and a covenant with 
hell;" and if the yoke sometimes prove galling, they may con- 
sole themselves that it is of their own making. Most of them 
propose to renew their oath of allegiance to this covenant of 
death as the best means of abolishing it! This shows the dan- 
gerous symptoms of the disease; they have lost their reason 
under the influence of this raging fever. Swear allegiance to 
Satan, that we may put Satan to flight! Renew the potation, 
that we may remove the surfeit! Plunge deeper into the 
slough, that we may find dry land ! Swim to the centre of the 
ocean, that we may escape drowning! Renounce by an oath 



50 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

our professed principles, that we may keep them! Alter our 
Confession, because we believe it as it now stands! In short, 
let us all go to work doing evil with all our might, that good 
may come! 

It would be well, if men knew that nothing less than Al- 
mighty power can break these chains. But they are not com- 
pelled to yield an active obedience. Herein lies their sin. If 
these United States would imbody in their constitution and en- 
force in their administration the law of nature, there would be 
no necessity to declare an indiscriminate warfare against all 
foreigners, as such. If they would do this there would be no 
more cries and prayers and tears ascending to Heaven against 
them from the poor and oppressed; no more alarms at the ap- 
proach of Romanism; no more mobs; no more murder of citi- 
zens in cool blood for the lawful exercise of their constitutional 
rights. This they will not do. It is said, they have not the 
power. But if God has not conferred upon magistrates and 
ministers the power to execute the functions of their office, 
why were they appointed? An agent without power to ac- 
complish the design of its agency, may as well be annihilated; 
it will answer no valuable purpose. But God has clothed his 
ministers with sufficient power to execute the design of their 
mission. The conclusion, then, is to my mind irresistible, 
that the magistrate of a Christian nation is bound to impose 
upon his subjects such a tax as may be necessary for the support 
of some form of religion which harmonizes with that law which 
he is appointed to administer, and to suppress every other form 
that transgresses that law, which of course must be a false re- 
ligion. Should any doubt this, we will not dispute, as it does 
not affect our principal arguments. But in the imposition of 
this tax, he must leave the subject free to select for himself the 
peculiar or distinctive creed and form of worship which he 
may desire to support, that conscience may be left in the free 
enjoyment of that liberty which God has conferred upon it 
The magistrate may not come in between me and my God in 
regard to his worship, but he may compel me to obey the so- 
cial law of nature, without any regard to my scruples of con- 
science on that subject. This distinction is recognised in most, 
if not all of our church courts. In regard to doctrine, order, 
and worship, a conscientious approbation is required; but in re- 
gard to acts of administration, which consist in the application 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 51 

f 

of the law to emergent causes, passive subjection only is re- 
quired, not conscientious approbation. Hence the right of pro- 
test. The same distinction is also recognised by the civil ma- 
gistrate, The French have a proverb, " He that has lost a law- 
suit is permitted to rail at his judges ten days;" but he must 
submit. 

New England, till infidelity poisoned the minds of her peo- 
ple, acted upon this plan with the happiest results. Her views 
of the magistrate's power circa sacra were entirely scriptural* 
during the whole of the eighteenth century, and till a very few 
years ago. After the first settlers had learned the principles 
of liberty, they abolished or suffered to become a dead letter 
all those laws, the principles of which they brought with them 
from popish Europe, that infringed upon the rights of con- 
science. Persecution expired altogether about the beginning 
of the eighteenth century. The law imposed a moderate tax 
upon every one for religion, and bound him to choose and sup- 
port some form of worship: and where individuals refused to 
make any selection for themselves, the state made the selection. 
The magistrate established no distinctive creed or form of 
worship, but enforced an external obedience to the decalogue,. 
During this period, New England enjoyed a greater degree of 
civil and religious liberty and general happiness, made more 
rapid progress in diffusing general intelligence, true religion, 
sound morality, and every other thing which goes to constitute 
national greatness and elevate the condition of men, than has 
ever been allotted to any other people on earth. If there be 
any exception to this remark, it is found in the superior reli- 
gious attainments in Scotland from 1638 to 1707, notwith- 
standing the oppressions of a tyrannical government, during 
the greater part of that period. 

Why then was not New England preserved from the wi- 
thering influence of infidelity ? Probably because she refused 
to adopt the divinely appointed form of church government 
Independency in the church is a pretty name for anarchy and 
every evil work. The error of New England then was not 
political, but ecclesiastical. What little they had of church or- 
der was, however, after it had been adopted by ecclesiastical 
councils recognised and maintained by the state, so far as it 
affected in its operation temporal interests. It is in vain then 5 
that evil-disposed persons declaim against the early persecution 



52 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

of New England in order to increase in the minds of ignorant 
and wicked men their natural hatred of truth; for the doctrine 
here advanced put an effectual end to persecution; and if uni- 
versally acted upon, by the powers that be, it would not only 
secure to men their natural rights, but would speedily extend 
the kingdom of Christ over all nations. By enforcing the law 
of nature kings will become nursing fathers and queens nursing 
mothers of the church. 

11. In the note to the sixth page the right of private judg- 
ment is asserted. How then is this right to be reconciled with 
the doctrine advanced p. 45, that passive subjection must be 
yielded to the magistrate in the decision of causes, when his 
action is supposed or known to be wrong?* 

The following observations will help to solve this difficulty. 

(1.) The right of private judgment regards religious doc- 
trines to be believed and duties to be practised. The subjec- 
tion to magistrates, when known to be wrong, regards civil 
duties, and is limited to individuals, and unlawful, unorganized 
bodies of men, such as mobs. The community, if a sufficient 
number can be enlisted, have always the right to organize, un- 
der any righteous conventional form agreed upon in an orderly 
manner, for the overthrow of tyranny; peaceably, if they can; 
forcibly, if they must. Hence the Scottish rebellion against 
James and other acts of resistance to the Erastian encroachments 
of England were entirely scriptural, as also the American revo- 
lution, and the present refusal of some among us to engage in 
any political action with the supporters of slave laws. 

(2.) Individuals are not, nor can they be authoritative ex- 
pounders of the civil law. For this magistrates are appointed, 
and there is no medium between passive subjection and a ge- 
neral, open, organized, forcible rebellion. A denial of this is 
equivalent to a denial of the divine authority of civil govern- 
ment. The minority of the nation, however, have the right, and 
may, whenever they have the power, throw off the yoke of ty- 
ranny in the use of all such lawful means as God in his provi- 
dence may furnish. 

(3.) As the magistrate can establish by law no particular 

* It is perhaps hardly necessary to state, that we use the terms " magistrate " 
and "magistracy" to express the whole machinery of civil government, and 
the terms "obedience" and " subjection" in reference to the action of courts 
of the last resort. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 53 

creed or form of worship, so he cannot be the judge here. He 
•cannot decide what the scriptures do or do not teach on these 
points. They have been superadded to the law of nature; pur- 
chased by the blood of Christ, and belong to his peculiar king- 
dom, who only is the Lord of conscience. Every individual 
must here be the sole judge, as an individual, and every eccle- 
siastical organization must be the sole judge, as a public body.. 
The magistrate must see that the liberty of his subjects in this 
respect be preserved inviolable; for, here, conscience is placed 
as high above the control of any, or all things, in heaven, earth, or 
hell, as God is high above his creatures. It belongs to the 
Romish whore and the ten horns of the beast on which she 
rides to deluge the earth in blood, rather than recognise this 
right of conscience. 

(4.) Neither individual professors of religion, as such, nor 
any other private persons, not appointed magistrates, nor eccle- 
siastical bodies, can be authoritative judges in controversies re- 
specting civil rights. Hence the claim of Romanism to crown 
and dethrone and prescribe the duty of kings, is one of those 
things whieh render that system destructive to the rights of all 
men. Her claim to order the magistrate to inflict civil penal- 
ties upon those whom she judges guilty of ecclesiastical offences, 
and her constant interference in politics, and intrigues with the 
governments of the world, called her fornication with the kings 
of the earth, constitute the common and most malignant enemy 
of God and man. Science, wealth, happiness, religion and liber- 
ty, in short, all the temporal and eternal interests of the human 
race, are arrested before her terrific approach. Her reign em- 
braces the dark ages of the world. With professed reve- 
rence for the Bible, she has extinguished its light. 

"He that would usurp an absolute lordship and tyranny over 
any people, need not put himself to the trouble and difficulty of 
abrogating and disannulling the laws made to maintain the 
common liberty; for he may frustrate their intent, and compass 
his own design as well, if he can get the power and authority 
to interpret them as he pleases, and add to them what he 
pleases, and to have his interpretations and additions stand for 
laws: if he can rule his people by his laws, and his laws by his 
lawyers. So the church of Rome, to establish her tyranny 
over men's consciences, needed not either to abolish or corrupt 
the holy scriptures, the pillars and supporters of Christian li- 
berty: (which in regard of the numerous multitudes of copies 

5* 



54 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

dispersed through all places, translated into almost all languages, 
guarded with all solicitous care and industry, had been an im- 
possible attempt:) but the more expedite way, and therefore 
more likely to be successful was, to gain the opinion and esteem 
of the public and authorized interpreter of them, and the au- 
thority of adding to them what doctrine she pleased, under the 
title of traditions or definitions. For by this means, she might 
both serve herself of all those clauses of scripture, which might 
be drawn to cast a favourable countenance upon her ambitious 
pretences, which in case the scripture had been abolished she 
could not have done; and yet be secure enough of having either 
her power limited or her corruptions and abuses reformed by 
them: this being once settled in the minds of men, that un- 
written doctrines, if proposed by her, were to be received with 
equal reverence lo those that were written; and that the sense 
of scripture was not that which seemed to men's reason and 
understanding to be so, but that which the church of Rome 
should declare to be so, seemed it never so unreasonable and 
incongruous. The matter being once thus ordered, and the 
holy scriptures being made in effect not your directors and 
judges (no farther than you please) but your servants and in- 
struments, always pressed and in readiness to advance your 
designs, and disabled wholly with minds so qualified to preju- 
dice or impeach them; it is safe for you to put a crown on 
their head, and a reed in their hands, and to bow before them, 
and cry, 'Hail, King of the Jews!' to pretend a great deal of 
esteem and respect, and reverence to them, as here you do. 
But to little purpose is verbal reverence without entire sub- 
mission and sincere obedience; and, as our Saviour said of some, 
so the scripture, could it speak, 1 believe would say to you, 
6 Why call ye me Lord, Lord, and do not that which I com- 
mand you?' Cast away the vain and arrogant pretence of 
infallibility, which make your errors incurable. Leave pic- 
turing God, and worshipping God by pictures. * Teach not 
for doctrine the commandments of men.' Debar not the laity 
of the testament of Christ's blood. Let your public prayers 
and psalms, and hymns, be in such language as is for the edifi- 
cation of the assistants. Take not from the clergy that liberty 
of marriage which Christ hath left them. Do not impose upon 
men that humility of worshipping angels which St. Paul con- 
demns. Teach no more proper sacrifices of Christ but one. 
Acknowledge them that die in Christ to be blessed, and « to 
rest from their labours.' Acknowledge the sacrament after 
consecration to be bread and wine, as well as Christ's body and 
blood. Acknowledge the gift of continency without marriage 
not to be given to all. Let not the weapons of your warfare 
be carnal, such as massacres, treasons, persecutions, and, in a 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 55 

word, all means either violent or fraudulent: these and other 
things, which the scripture commands you, do, and then we 
shall willingly give you such testimony as you deserve; but, 
till you do so, to talk of estimation, respect and reverence to 
the scripture, is nothing else but talk." — Chillingworth, p. 105, 
106. 

So, under the pretence of attachment to republican govern- 
ment, the hordes of Romanists among us, combined with un- 
principled and atheistical politicians, are, not altering the let- 
ter of our civil constitution, but bringing it into subjection to 
Romanism. The people, dreaming of liberty, are forging chains 
for themselves. 

(5.) The magistrate is an authoritative judge of the law of 
nature, and the avenger of every outward transgression of that 
law under any and every form of pretence which men may as- 
sume as a cloak or excuse of disobedience; but respecting re- 
ligious creeds and forms of worship there neither is nor can be 
any visible or earthly judge, binding the conscience. The 
church's power is declarative and administrative; her sword is 
the word of God; and all obedience to her is voluntary; and 
not only voluntary to her, but the obedience of all her members 
to Christ is voluntary. He will accept no other. His people 
are a willing people. To acts of administration, however, or 
the court's application of the law to emergent cases, members 
of the church may yield a passive subjection, while they disap- 
prove and protest against these acts. Chillingworth has marked 
and illustrated with sufficient accuracy the distinction between 
civil and ecclesiastical authority, the right of private judgment in 
regard to each, and consequently the nature and difference of 
that obedience which is due to each. 

"I grant it very necessary, that besides the law-maker speak- 
ing in the law, there should be other judges to determine civil 
and criminal controversies, and to give every man that justice 
which the law allows him. But your argument drawn from 
hence to show a necessity of a visible judge in controversies 
of religion, I say is sophistical; and that for many reasons. 

"First, because the variety of civil cases is infinite, and there- 
lore there cannot be possibly enough provided for the determi- 
nation of them; and therefore there must be a judge to supply 
out of the principles of reason, the interpretation of the law, 
where it is defective. But the scripture, we say, is a perfect 
rule of faith, and therefore needs no supply of the defects of it. 

"Secondly, to execute the letter of the law, according to 



56 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

rigour, would be many times unjust, and therefore there is need 
of a judge to moderate it; whereof in religion there is no use 
at all. 

"Thirdly, in civil and criminal causes the parties have for 
the most part so much interest, and very often so little honesty 
that they will not submit to a law, though never so plain, if it 
be against them; or will not see it to be against them, though 
it be never so plainly; whereas, if men were honest, and the 
law were plain and extended to all cases, there would be little 
need of judges. Now in matters of religion, when the question 
is, whether every man be a fit judge and chooser for himself, 
we suppose men honest, and such as understand the difference 
between a moment and eternity. And such men, we conceive, 
will think it highly concerns them to be of the true religion, 
but nothing at all that this or that religion should be the true. 
And then we suppose that all the necessary points of religion 
are plain and easy, and consequently every man in this cause 
to be a competent judge for himself: because it concerns himself 
to judge right as much as eternal happiness is worth. And if 
through his own default he judge amiss, he alone shall suffer 
for it. 

"Fourthly, in civil controversies we are obliged only to ex- 
ternal passive obedience, and not to an internal and active. We 
are bound to obey the sentence of the judge, or not to resist it, 
but not always to believe it just: but in matters of religion, 
such a judge is required whom we should be obliged to believe 
to have judged aright. So that in civil controversies every 
honest understanding man is fit to be a judge; but in religion 
none but he that is infallible. 

"Fifthly, in civil causes there is means and power, when the 
judge hath decreed, to compel men to obey his sentence; 
otherwise, I believe laws alone would be to as much purpose 
for the ending of differences, as laws and judges both. But all 
the power in the world is neither fit to convince, nor able to 
compel a man's conscience to consent to any thing. Worldly 
terror may prevail so far as to make men profess a religion 
which they believe not, (such men, I mean, who know not that 
there is a heaven provided for martyrs, and a hell for those that 
dissemble such truths as are necessary to be professed:) but to 
iorce either any man to believe either what he believes not, or 
an honest man to dissemble what he does believe, (if God only 
commands him to profess it,) or to profess what he does not 
believe, all the powers in the world are too weak, with all the 
powers of hell to assist them. 

" Sixthly, in civil controversies the case cannot be so put, but 
there may be a judge to end it, who is not a party; in contro- 
versies of religion, it is in a manner impossible to be avoided, 
but the judge must be a party. For this must be the first, 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 57 

whether he be a judge or no, and in that he must be a party. 
Sure I am, the pope, in the controversies of our time, is a chief 
party: for it highly concerns him, even as much as his popedom 
is worth, not to yield any one point of his religion to be er- 
roneous. And he is a man subject to like passions with other 
men; and therefore we may justly decline his sentence, for 
fear temporal respects should either blind his judgment or 
make him pronounce against it. 

"Seventhly, in civil controversies, it is impossible Titus 
should hold the land in question and Sempronius too; and 
therefore either the plaintiff must injure the defendant, by dis- 
quieting his possession, or the defendant wrong the plaintiff by 
keeping his right from him. But in controversies of religion, 
the case is otherwise. I may hold my opinion, and do you no 
wrong; and you yours, and do me none: nay, we may both of 
us hold our opinion, and yet do ourselves no harm; provided 
the difference be not touching any thing necessary to salvation, 
and that we love truth so well, as to be diligent to inform our 
conscience, and constant in following it. 

"Eighthly, for the deciding of civil controversies, men may 
appoint themselves a judge: but in matters of religion, this 
office may be given to none but whom God hath designed for 
it; who doth not always give us those things which we conceive 
most expedient for ourselves. 

"Ninthly and lastly, for the ending of civil controversies, who 
does not see, it is absolutely necessary, that not only judges 
should be appointed, but that it should be known and unques- 
tioned who they are? Thus all the judges of our land are known 
men, known to be judges, and no man can doubt or question but 
these are the men. Otherwise, if it were a disputable thing, 
who were these judges, and they have no certain warrant for 
their authority, but only some topical congruities; would not 
any man say, such judges, in all likelihood, would rather mul- 
tiply controversies than end them? So likewise if our Saviour, 
the king of heaven, had intended that all controversies in reli- 
gion should be by some visible judge finally determined, who 
can doubt, but in plain terms he would have expressed himself 
about this matter? He would have said plainly, The bishop 
of Rome I have appointed to decide all emergent controversies; 
for that our Saviour designed the bishop of Rome to his office, 
and yet would not say so, nor cause it to be written, ad rei 
memoriam, by any of the evangelists or apostles, so much as 
once; but leave it to be drawn out of uncertain principles, by 
thirteen or fourteen more uncertain consequences, he that can 
believe it, let him. 

" All these reasons, I hope, will convince you, that though we 
have, and have great necessity of, judges in civil and criminal 



58 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

causes; yet you may not conclude from hence, that there is any 
public authorized judge to determine controversies in religion, 
nor any necessity there should be any. 

"But the scripture stands in need of some watchful and un- 
erring eye to guard it, by means of whose assured vigilancy we 
may undoubtedly receive it sincere and pure. Very true; but 
this is no other than the watchful eye of Divine Providence; 
the goodness whereof will never suffer, that the scripture 
should be depraved, and corrupted, but that in them should be 
always extant a conspicuous and plain way to eternal happiness. 
Neither can any thing be more palpably inconsistent with his 
goodness, than to suffer scripture to be undiscernibly corrupted 
in any matter of moment, and yet to exact of men the belief of 
those verities, which, without their fault, or knowledge, or 
possibility of prevention, were defaced out of them. So that 
God requiring of men to believe scripture in its purity, engages 
himself to see it preserved in sufficient purity; and you need not 
fear but he will satisfy his engagement." — Pages, 113 — 115. 

We may see from the sound principles here advanced by 
Chillingworth: 

(1.) Why the magistrate cannot establish by law any dis- 
tinctive creed. It necessarily infringes upon the prerogative 
of God as sole Lord of the conscience, and destroys that liber- 
ty wherewith Christ has made his people free. 

(2.) Why the magistrate must be the ultimate judge of all 
controversies, whether connected with religion or not, so far 
as temporal interests are concerned. He is a peace officer ap- 
pointed for this purpose. 

(3.) If the magistrate be such a judge as is here supposed, 
then he must have a law as a standard of judgment. He is not 
the giver, but the executor of law, we speak of the supreme civil 
power in reference to all its departments and all its subordinate 
agents. This law of the magistrate, we have seen, is the deca- 
logue; for every law of man which prevents, or in any way 
hinders the operation and full execution of this supreme law is 
not only invalid, but the enactors, executors, or even apologists 
of any such law have brought themselves under the condemning 
sentence of the supreme law, and must answer to the great Law- 
giver himself, as best they can. 

(4.) But some will inquire, after all that has been said, is it 
quite certain that the magistrate is bound to enforce the first 
table of the law for the regulation of the outward and social 
conduct of men ? Does not that table refer exclusively to the 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 59 

glory of God ? Is not the church appointed exclusively to take 
care of the holy things of God ? and the magistrate to take care 
exclusively of the natural rights of men? Does the magistrate's 
duty regard men as members of civil society and not as Chris- 
tians? If all these questions could be satisfactorily answered 
in the affirmative, we are free to acknowledge that this answer 
would destroy most of our arguments. It would do more. It 
would prohibit the magistrate from recognising in any shape 
the being, name, law, or providence of God. He could not 
administer an oath in the name of God, for that is an act of re- 
ligious worship. He could not permit the introduction of the 
Bible into our common schools, for that teaches that whatsoever 
men do, even to eating and drinking, they are bound to do all 
from a regard to the glory of God. He could appoint no reli- 
gious teacher in the army or navy, or in any prison in the land.* 
He could restrain no breach of the Sabbath, however flagrant; 
that is a day peculiarly devoted to the glory of God. And it 
would be a great stretch of power in him to prevent a mob from 
breaking up a worshipping assembly on the Sabbath, especially 
if they should do this by shouting, noise, and clamour, being 
careful not to assault persons, nor destroy property ; for reli- 
gious worship, Sabbath sanctification, are altogether Christian, 
and the magistrate's duty respects men not as Christians, but as 
members of civil society. I suppose Thomas Paine himself 
desired nothing more for the establishment of his kingdom of 
darkness than that the magistrate should refuse to enforce an 
external obedience to the first table of the law. 

But let candid men reflect, and they will see that both tables 
must stand or fall together. 1. The authority of the Law- 
giver must be established and recognised as the basis of all law. 

2. If the Lawgiver be not honoured, the law will not be obeyed. 

3. There never has been, there never can be a nation, heathen, 
or professedly Mohammedan, or Christian, without a more or 
less direct acknowledgment of some supernatural power as the 
fountain of all human authority, and that if this be not the true 
God it must be a false one. 4. That an outward observance 
of the first table of the law is no less essential to the preserva- 
tion of civil rights than the observance of the second; and there- 

The papists maintain that the magistrate cannot appoint chaplains in the 
navy, &c. till the nation establish their creed by law. Many politicians seem 
to be of their mind. The Pope having claimed lordship over the conscience, 
©f course popery can never recognize the rights of conscience. 



60 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

fore, although the duty of magistrates directly respects men 
not as Christians, but as members of civil society, yet they must 
enforce the first table or they cannot secure the preservation of 
the civil interests of society for any considerable length of time. 
"When thou shalt say, I will set a king over me, it shall be 
when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall 
write him a copy of this law in a book; and it shall be with 
him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he 
may learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep the words of this 
law and these statutes to do them; and that he turn not aside 
from the commandment, to the right hand or to the left." 
Deut. xvii. 14, 18, 19, 20. 

Those who deny the authority and duty of magistrates to 
enforce external obedience to the first table of the law do ne- 
cessarily adopt the following atheistical principles: — 

" 1. Men's natural or civil rights to their property, liberty, 
profits and honours, are not originally derived from God, — and 
magistrates ought to protect them in their most outrageous 
sinning against him. 

"2. Men's consciences have a right and authority underived 
from, and independent of God, by which it can warrant them to 
think and speak of, or act towards God, as insolently and blas- 
phemously as they please. 

" 3. That, if the law of God be any rule to men, it is not so, in 
respect of any intrinsic meaning affixed to it by him, but 
merely as it is understood by every man, particularly in that 
which relates to their behaviour towards God. 

" 4. All men being ready to mistake, we ought always to be- 
lieve that our opponents may have as just a view of the Scriptures 
as ourselves, and never to condemn them for that which they 
do not own to be blasphemy, idolatry, or heresy. 

"5. Magistrates' right and authority to govern others, doth not 
originate in God as the Creator, Preserver, and King of nations, 
but in magistrates themselves, or in their subjects; and so may 
be exercised as they please, particularly in requiring or allow- 
ing their subjects to belie, blaspheme, or rob God. 

"6. Magistrates may be moral governors, deputies or lieute- 
nants, under God, without having any power or authority re- 
lating to religion, or his honour. 

" 7. Not the law of God natural or revealed, but the laws of 
nations ought to be the supreme standard of all civil government. 

"S. Not the declarative glory of God, as the Most High over 
all the earth, but the civil peace and prosperity of nations, ought 
to be the chief end of magistrates in all their acts of govern- 
ment. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 61 

« 9. Men's natural rights of conscience, or their civil rights, 
or the authority of magistrates, may or ought to empower, war- 
rant, or protect them in gross heresy, blasphemy, idolatry, or 
other outrageous abuse and injury of God; but can by no means 
warrant or protect them in calumny, theft, murder, or any 
other injuries against men. 

" 10. There is no real difference between moral good and evil, 
at least in things pertaining to God; and so true and false religion 
are equally calculated to promote the welfare of civil society, 
and the virtues which render men good, peaceable, useful, 
and honourable rulers or subjects, — and hence heretics, blas- 
phemers, and idolaters may be good subjects. 

" 11. The favour or indignation of God is of no importance to 
civil society; and therefore magistrates ought to use no means to 
procure his favour by the encouragement of true religion, or 
to avert his indignation by the restraint of gross heresy, blas- 
phemy, or idolatry, — but only labour to procure the friend- 
ship of men, and prevent their injuring the character, property, 
or bodies of their subjects. — That all these propositions are re- 
ally atheistical, is manifest. They all give up with the neces- 
sary existence, infinite excellency, and absolute supremacy of 
God, without any of which he cannot be God at all. — That 
Locke, Hoadly, Blackburn, Voltaire, and others, advocates for 
authoritative toleration of false religion, found their pleadings 
on the above propositions, is no less evident to every judicious 
and unbiassed observer. — Nay, did not modesty forbid, 1 might 
defy all the world to plead for such toleration, without taking 
all, or some of the above or like atheistical propositions for 
granted." — Brown. 

12. Heresy or false religion, in the sense of the Westminster 
Confession, should be suppressed by magistrates. We have 
already cautioned the reader not to impute to us the views of 
others any farther than we adopt them, so we desire that the 
argument quoted from Brown of Haddington in the preceding 
section, should be restricted to the application we have made 
of it. It would be foreign to our purpose to inquire into the 
application the author may himself have made of it. Whether 
he maintained that the magistrate should establish a distinctive 
creed and suppress all others, is not the question before us. 
We quote his reasoning to prove the absurdity and wickedness 
of tolerating men in outward violations of the first table of the 
decalogue, and for no other purpose. This it does prove. If 
not, let our opponents show it, and not impute to us principles 
which we deny and abhor. To establish by law a distinctive 
6 



62 DIVINE AND HTJMAN RIGHTS. 

creed and suppress all others is the essence of tyranny, de- 
structive alike to the rights of conscience and civil liberty. 
How then can the magistrate suppress heresy and a false reli- 
gion? It is such heresy and such a false religion as plainly 
amounts to an outward breach of the decalogue, that is to be 
suppressed. Such the magistrate may not tolerate; and when- 
ever he does this, he does it at the peril of himself and his 
country. This is the heresy and false religion spoken of in 
the Confession. Heresy in law is the propagation of some 
sentiment or sentiments against the generally acknowledged 
doctrines of Christianity which are fundamental to its exist- 
ence. The first table of the law is equally the basis of Chris- 
tianity and civil government. So a false religion is not a cor- 
rupted Christianity, but a religion repugnant to the being of 
Christianity, a religion which cannot co-exist with Christianity, 
in any country, under any form of government, or among any 
people. Such are Paganism, Mohammedanism, and Popery. 
When our reforming ancestors covenanted to extirpate not pa- 
pists, but popery, they simply engaged to obey the decalogue. 
I blush for their degenerate sons. What will be the doom of 
all Presbyterians who deny the descending obligation of these 
covenants, eternity alone can disclose! They have rejected 
not reforming ancestors, but God ! Professing to be the friends 
of Christ, they are on the side of his enemies! They wound 
him in the house of his friends! They speak sneeringly and 
contemptuously of those who stand by the Westminster Con- 
fession! They sport with the oath of God by which they have 
bound their own souls! Degenerate children! But it is the 
fashion of the times for men to answer with abuse and slander 
those portions of the divine word which condemn their sins. 
They have fairly seated themselves in the scorner's chair! 

Who shall be the judge of what constitutes such heresy and 
false religion as amount to an external violation of the deca- 
logue? The magistrate is God's appointed minister for this 
very purpose. Besides, the common sense of mankind, aided 
by the light of revelation, when released from the chains of 
Romanism, has unconsciously decided this question, by very 
clear and strongly marked distinctions between a corrupted 
Christianity and a false religion. No sect can be charged with 
maintaining a false religion who recognise the ten command- 
ments to be exclusively the charter of human rights, the moral 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 63 

law of the world, and of paramount obligation upon all men 
in all their relations. This is done by all protestant sects who 
mutually acknowledge the validity of each other's ordinances. 
If I acknowledge the ordinations, baptisms, &c. of any Chris- 
tian sect, I cannot at the same time regard their religion as a 
false religion; though I may justly regard it as a corrupted 
Christianity, and on that account refuse to unite with them in 
their ecclesiastical organization. So far as protestants deny the 
validity of each other's ordinances, that denial arises either 
from some defect in the form of the administration, or because 
they have so far violated the ten commandments as to con- 
stitute their system a false religion. Romanists and their kin- 
dred, Puseyites, by their denial of Protestant ordinances have 
demonstrated themselves to be Antichrist; because they, in 
fact, rest the validity of these ordinances, not upon the autho- 
rity of Christ speaking in his word, but upon the authority of 
the Pope, or of some visible human authority. Protestants 
acknowledge the validity of the ordinances of Christ, if they 
are dispensed by any regular body of professing Christians en- 
titled to that name. But how they can acknowledge the va- 
lidity of the ordinances of the Romish Antichrist or of any 
other seet who transgress the law of nature, we see not? for 
it is evident that every such sect has embraced a false religion. 
Especially is this true of Romanism: therefore we conclude 
that popery should be suppressed, and will be when magistrates 
learn the duties of their office. The following considerations 
will make this evident: — 

1. Popery is a system of outward and gross idolatry, and to 
sustain its idolatry has suppressed the second precept of the 
decalogue. 

2. It is the inveterate enemy of the scriptures, the charter 
of all civil rights, and the means of salvation. 

3. It enforces a distinctive religious creed and form of wor- 
ship by civil pains and penalties, requiring that magistrates 
should be mere passive tools for the infliction of her penalties. 

4. It claims dominion over magistrates. 

5. It claims for its priesthood exemption from the authority 
of the civil magistrate in civil causes. 

6. It does not hold its subjects bound even by oaths made 
with magistrates or individuals, if in their judgment the viola- 



64 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

tion of such oaths would promote the interests of their reli- 
gion. 

7. It makes the infliction of death upon all who dissent from 
the creed of the church and her superstitious observances, or 
who refuse subjection to the authority of the pope, an act of 
religious worship. 

8. It has not, cannot surrender any of these features; for it 
claims infallibility; always has enforced, and is still enforcing 
its demands, wherever, and whenever it has the power. 

Seeing all these things, and others that might be named, are 
universally acknowledged facts, it necessarily follows that po- 
pery can never co-exist either with Christianity or the rights 
of men; therefore magistrates are bound to suppress it, and 
every Presbyterian on earth, whether he acknowledge it or 
not, is under a covenant obligation to use all the lawful means 
in his power for the extirpation of popery. But the great ma- 
, jority are now nursing it. Perhaps, should they find themselves 
incarcerated in prisons, tortured upon racks, and many of their 
brethren slain with the most barbarous engines of cruelty Sa- 
tanic cunning can invent, they might see their sin. If, how- 
ever, the country will have popery, rather than obey the divine 
law, they must reap its rewards. The Jews would have idola- 
try, and they enjoyed its benefits for seventy years in Babylon. 
13. There is in some respects a marked difference between 
our condition and that of Presbyterians in Britain, which ren- 
ders some of the arguments of distinguished ministers in that 
country inapplicable to our circumstances, while much of their 
reasoning is as applicable to us as it is to them, truth being al- 
ways the same, and yet applicable to every condition in which 
men can be placed, requiring always the performance of the 
duties which pertain to the peculiar relations and conditions in 
which the providence of God may place us. They have creeds 
established by law, and toleration for dissenters; they have po- 
litical and local matters connected with their covenants, with 
which we have no concern. But every thing in the British 
covenants scriptural and applicable to our condition is binding 
upon all Presbyterians, as all have descended from these cove- 
nanting ancestors, and the Associate church in this country has 
sworn to these covenants, as far as they are applicable to our 
condition, and consequently to maintain the authority and duty 
of magistrates as pointed out in the religious principles to 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 65 

which the covenanters have obligated themselves. In Britain 
they are compelled to contend against the government for in- 
truding into the house of God, In all other respects our con- 
dition and theirs is very similar. In both countries faithful men 
are compelled to contend with infidelity, government toleration 
of popery, &c, and, worst of all, with a host of apostatizing bre- 
thren. Let us learn to "endure as seeing Him who is invisible. 7 ' 
But we give no more countenance to the establishment of 
creeds by law, or to the Erastian encroachments of Great Bri- 
tain than we do to the atheistical radicals both in this and that 
country. The civil power is not designed for the propagation of 
true religion; its immediate duty is to regulate the social relations 
and intercourse of men. The high church party, in common 
with popery, contend that the propagation of religion is one of 
the principal ends of magistracy. If there be any difference 
between churchmen and papists, it is this: the former are wil- 
ling to bow the knee to the magistrate, hold their ecclesiastical 
offices from him, and become his humble and obedient servants 
in the propagation of religion: the latter, holding office from the 
Pope, require the magistrate to become their servant: the for- 
mer make the king the head of the church, the latter the Pope': 
both agree in rejecting the Lord Jesus Christ. "Mr. Glad- 
stone's [a high churchman and member of parliament] whole 
theory rests on this great fundamental proposition — that the 
propagation of religious truth is one of the principal ends of 
government, as government."* To this we reply in the lan- 
guage of another, "Magistrates are not the deputies of Christ 
as mediator, but they are of God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost 
and all their administrations are subjected to Christ, as Head over 
all things to his church. "f Thus, Christ is sole king in his 
own house, and has officers of his own appointment, for the 
propagation of the true religion, altogether independent of ma- 
gistrates in regard to the peculiar duties of their office, as the 
magistrate is of them in regard to the peculiar duties of his of- 
fice; both being under the dominion of Christ as mediator, the 
one to enforee the law of nature, the other to administer the 
covenant of grace. The gospel ministry must be subject to the 
magistrate in the external things of the church so far as they 

* Macauley on church and state, Miscellanies, p. 379. 
,t Brown of Haddington. 

«* 



66 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

affect social rights, and the magistrate must be subject to the 
ministry in regard to all religious ordinances; and must be in 
subjection as an individual to the government of the church, 
even as the humblest individual in his dominions. In the body 
of Christ there is no artificial, natural, nor earthly distinction, 
not even that of male or female. 

"All these different forms of power and authority being de- 
rived from the same God, may have the same things for their 
object, but viewed in different respects. The same man may 
be subject to the power of his conscience as he is a rational 
creature, — subject to the power of parents as a child, — subject 
to the power of masters as a servant, — subject to the power 
of magistrates as a member of the commonwealth, — subject 
to the power of Church-rulers as a member of an organized 
visible Church, — subject to the mediatorial power of Christ, as 
a member of his mystical body, or an agent for promoting the 
welfare of it. — The same good work of piety or virtue may, or 
ought to be required by conscience, by parents, masters, ma- 
gistrates, ministers, and even by Christ as mediator, in different 
respects, as calculated to promote the welfare of the persons, 
families, nations, and churches concerned, — in subordination to 
the glory of God as their respective proprietor and superior. 

"The performance of the same good work may be encouraged 
by rewards from all these different powers, answerable to their 
respective forms. — The same vices of idolatry, blasphemy, ca- 
lumny, treason, theft, murder, &c. as in different respects hurt- 
ful to persons, families, civil societies, and churches, may, and, 
ought to be prohibited by all these different powers, and re- 
sented by each, as hurtful to itself, as subordinated to God, — in 
a manner answerable to its particular nature and department, 
—by conscience with stinging rebukes, — by parents with cor- 
rection, disinheriting, or the like, — by masters with frowns, 
stripes, abridgment of wages, or the like, — by magistrates with 
public dishonour, fining, imprisonment, or death, — by church- 
rulers with ecclesiastical rebuke, excommunication, — by Christ 
with temporal, spiritual, or eternal judgment, Acts xxiv. 16; 
Josh. xxiv. 15; Psal. ci.; Mat. v. vi. vii., &c. 

All these powers of conscience, husbands, parents, masters, 
magistrates, church-rulers, and of Christ as mediator, proceeding 
from an infinitely wise, powerful and good God, are each of 
them, in its own place, altogether sufficient to gain its own 
end. Nevertheless, it mightily tends to the advantage of each, 
that all of them be rightly exercised at once, and to the hurt 
of all the rest, if any of them be not. If conscience act faith- 
folly, this promotes the regular and comfortable exercise of 
the power of husbands, parents, masters, magistrates or minis- 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 67 

ters, &c. And it is to the advantage of conscience, if they re- 
gularly exercise their power, and especially if Christ exercise 
his, in a remarkable manner. It is much to the advantage of 
church and state, if husbands, parents, and masters, faithfully 
exercise their power in their respective departments; and much 
to their hurt, if they do not. If the rulers in church and state, 
faithfully discharge their trust, it will tend much to promote 
the welfare of families. The more faithfully ministers labour 
in winning souls to Christ, and teaching men to live soberly, 
righteously, and godly in view of Christ's second coming, the 
more easy will the work of magistrates, and the greater the 

happiness of the commonwealth be. The more faithfully 

magistrates act in curbing of crimes, and promoting obedience 
to God the King of nations, as a mean of securing his felici- 
tating blessing to the commonwealth, the more delightfully 
will church-power be exercised, and the more abundantly it 
will tend to the welfare of the church. Nay, though the me- 
diatorial power of Christ be infinitely sufficient in its own place, 
to answer its own ends, yet the delightful exercise and success 
of it is not a little promoted by the faithful exercise of the 
powers of conscience, husbands, parents, masters, magistrates 
and church-rulers, Acts xxiv. 16; 1 Tim. v; Eph. iv. — vi.; Col. 
iii. iv.; 1 and 2 Tim.; Titus i. — iii.; 1 Pet. ii. 5; Psalm ii. 10, — 
12; Rev. ii. 15; xvii. 14, 16; xxi. 24; Isaiah xlix. 23; lx. 3,4, 10, 
16. 

"Though the marital, parental, magisterial, magistratical, and 
ministerial powers be altogether distinct from, and independent 
of one another, and each of them has its own particular exer- 
cises pertaining to it alone; — yet the same person, in respect of 
different relations, may be at once superior or inferior to ano- 
ther person, — and so may be required to fulfil the particular du- 
ties of his station, by one who hath not any lawful right to per- 
form them himself. Thus magistrates and ministers, as such, 
may require husbands to perform their duties to their wives, 
parents to perform theirs to their children, or masters theirs to 
their servants, as a mean of promoting the welfare of the com- 
monwealth and of the Church, in obedience to God, and aiming 
at his glory. An uncrowned husband of a queen may command 
her faithfully to exercise her magistratical power, as a mean 
of honour and happiness to his family; and she as queen may 
command him in every thing relating to the welfare of the state 
as her offieer or subject. A parent may require his son, as such, 
faithfully to exercise his ministerial, magistratical, or magiste- 
rial power as a mean of honour and happiness to his family. 
A son may command his father, who is his servant, in every 
thing pertaining to the service due from him, and even to order 
his family aright, in so far as it tends to promote that service. 



68 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

Ministers, as the ambassadors of Christ, have power to require 
magistrates, as church-members, faithfully to exercise their ma- 
gistratical power, so as may best promote the honour of Christ, 
and the welfare of his Church. And, on the other hand, magis- 
trates have power to require ministers, as their subjects, faith- 
fully to exercise their ministerial power, as a mean of rendering 
the nation pious and virtuous, in order to promote its happiness 
— and all this in subordination to the law, and to promote the 
glory of God as the supreme governor of families, churches, or 
nations. 

"Though the marital, parental, magisterial, magistratical and 
ministerial powers, have, each of them, something for its pe- 
culiar and distinguishing object, in which no other power can 
interfere with it; — Thus, it is always unlawful for husbands, 
parents, masters, or ministers, as such, to assume the power of 
civil magistrates in levying taxes, adjudging criminals to death, 
— always unlawful for parents, masters, or magistrates, as such, 
to preach the gospel, dispense sacraments, or church-censures 
— yet if the exercise of some of these powers be fearfully 
neglected or abused, the other powers may be exercised, in 
order to rectify the disorders occasioned, farther than would 
be proper if there were no such neglect, abuse, or disorder. 
Thus, if husbands, parents, or masters, fearfully abuse their 
power, relative to wives, children, or servants, the rulers of 
church or state, for the benefit of these societies, may interfere 
more with their family concerns, than would be proper in 
other circumstances. If church rulers be notoriously negli- 
gent or wicked, magistrates, as church members, and to promote 
the welfare of the state, may do more in the reformation of the 
church, than would be proper for them, if church rulers were 
diligent and faithful. And, if through the indolence or wick- 
edness of magistrates, the affairs of the nation be thrown into 
terrible confusion, ministers, as members of the commonwealth, 
and to promote the welfare of the chureh, may do more in the 
rectification of affairs, than would be proper, if the magistrates 
were faithful, 2 Kings xi.; 2 Chron. xxiii. 

"All governing authority empowers the possessors of it, to 
issue forth laws or commandments, binding on the subject of it 
But these laws or commandments can extend their binding 
force no farther than the particular department belonging to 
that power, as by that, every particular form of authority, de- 
rived from God, is limited. The laws or commandments of 
parents, masters, magistrates, and church rulers, extend only to 
external things in the family, commonwealth, or church. These 
of conscience and of Christ extend also to that which is inward 
in the heart.— And as all human superiors are imperfect m 
knowledge themselves, and cannot enable their subjects perfect- 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 69 

ly to understand their whole duty, it is necessary that laws of 
families or nations, or constitutions of churches require nothing 
but what is plainly agreeable to the law of God, and nothing 
in religion but what is plainly required by the word of God, 
that so nothing may be contrary to these laws but what is not 
only really, but plainly contrary to the word of God. And, 
the weaker the subjects are, the more condescension ought to 
be exercised towards them in this matter, Rom. xv. 1, 2* 

14. If civil government be a divine institution, and if indi- 
viduals and unorganized bodies of men have not the right to 
resist magistrates, even when known to be wrong, as we have 
asserted, will it not necessarily follow, that individuals must 
yield a voluntary obedience to the powers that be in every in- 
stance? No. It only follows that they must yield a passive sub- 
jection from necessity to wrong commands which do not require 
them to disobey actively any divine law. For as Rutherford 
well observes, "It is natural that men join in civil society,though 
the manner of the union be voluntary." By which we under- 
stand that individuals are bound by the law of nature to unite 
with others in setting up civil government, but are left to the 
exercise of their own free will in regard to the particular form 
of government which the majority may adopt, they may ac- 
knowledge, or decline any particular form, according as they 
judge it to be sinful or otherwise, while they as individuals 
make no forcible resistance to the majority. Though we may 
be overwhelmed, borne down and oppressed by unrighteous 
laws, sustained by superior physical force, we cannot without 
sin give any countenance to such laws; and this is the reason 
why a conscientious man should prefer voluntary disfranchise- 
ment to sinful obligations. We may not in any circumstances 
enter into a contract, association, or covenant obligation of any 
kind for the accomplishment of any object, however excellent 
or necessary that object may be, if there be any thing sinful 
required as a part of such contract or covenant. Consequently 
we cannot take an oath to a civil government which binds our 
souls to do any thing of which God has said ye shall not do it. 
God has said, Ye shall not oppress the poor, nor the stranger, 
but ye shall break every yoke. We go and swear we will 
do all in our power to oppress the poor and the stranger. We 
will make the yoke of wood brass, and the yoke of brass iron, 
and will perpetuate every yoke now upon the necks of the poor 
* Rev. John Brown. 



70 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

and the stranger, and will subject as many more to the yoke as 
God in his providence may place withi n the grasp of our power ! 
We will vote for those who perpetuate this tyranny ! We will 
be partakers with them in the iniquity and its rewards! True, 
we have sworn allegiance to Zion's King in his house; we have 
sealed the covenant confirmed with his precious blood: True, 
God, holy angels, righteous men, as also wicked men and 
devils have witnessed our tears of penitential sorrow for sin, 
for all sin, while with the affecting memorials of his broken 
body and shed blood in our hands and in our mouths we said, 
all that the Lord our God has spoken will we do and be obedient : 
True, our Lord has said, Break every yoke: But, we hear some 
one say, — I made these vows as a Christian, I now swear to re- 
nounce them as a politician! then I was in the church, now I 
am in the state! then I was performing a holy duty, now a 
natural duty! then I had a regard to the soul; now 1 am acting 
for the body! then I was seeking spiritual and eternal interests, 
now I am in pursuit of temporal good: then I swore to obey 
God, now I swear to obey the magistrate! Magistrates have 
no business to make laws respecting religion, and the constitu- 
tion prohibits them! The church has no business with poli- 
tics! Magistracy is from God, he that resists " shall receive 
damnation." Bad government is better than none! If I re- 
fuse the oath to Caesar or deprive myself of the privilege of 
interfering in the affairs of Caesar's household, the government 
will fall altogether into the hands of wicked men! Besides 
the constitution provides for its amendment, and we should 
vote to effect an amendment! But suppose, it should turn out 
in the day of judgment that God never permitted his^people to 
do evil that good may come — that he never permitted them to 
enter into sinful engagements with their fellow men, nor go 
with a multitude to do evil, — that he required political rulers 
and subjects to obey and administer his law, — and suppose he 
should sentence to remediless wo all such as in this life took 
an oath of an allegiance to the civil powers that be, which re- 
quired them to trample his law in the dust, what then is to be- 
come of these politico-religious men? If he condemn the po- 
litician to wrath, will the Christian escape? or rather will not 
his perjury aggravate his doom? Will it not be more tolera- 
ble in the day of judgment for Sodomites than for him? Let 
every man be persuaded in his own mind. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 71 

We have said in the note, page 6th, "we have no doubt of 
the application of Rom. xiii. &c. to the then existing Roman 
government," that is, we have no doubt that the apostle re- 
quired Christians as individuals to be in subjection for peace's 
sake and also to obey lawful commands for conscience sake, 
while, they were required not only to abstain from all volun- 
tary and active participation in its evils, directly or indirectly, 
but also to bear a faithful testimony against those evils. But 
this is not the whole or even principal view of that passage. 
The grand and ultimate design of the Spirit of God in that 
passage undoubtedly was to reveal and explain the law by 
which God has bound all the nations of the earth to the end 
of the world, and for the violation of which He will inflict con- 
dign punishment. 

"In comparing the writings of all philosophers and lawyers 
with Paul's, you seem to me to act rightly, in allowing; to his 
authority so much preponderance in the balance. But you 
should consider whether you have sufficiently weighed his opi- 
nions; for you ought to examine, not only his words, but also 
at what times, to what persons, and for what purposes he wrote. 
First, then, let us see what Paul wrote. In the third chapter 
of his letter to Titus, he writes, " Put subjects in mind to be 
obedient to principalities and powers, and to be ready for 
every good work." Here you see, I presume, what end he as- 
signs to obedience. In the second chapter of his epistle to 
Timothy, the same apostle writes, "That we should pray for 
all men, even for kings and other magistrates, that we may lead 
a peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty." Here, also, you 
see that he proposes, as the end of prayer, not the security of 
kings, but the tranquillity of the church; and, hence it will be 
no difficult matter to comprehend his form of prayer. In his 
epistle to the Romans, his definition of a king is accurate, even 
to logical subtilty; for he says that "a king is God's minister, 
wielding the sword of the law, for the punishment of the bad, 
and for the support and aid of the good." " For these passages 
of Paul's," says Chrysostom, "relate not to a tyrant, but to a 
real and legitimate sovereign, who personates a genuine god 
upon earth, and to whom resistance is certainly resistance to 
the ordinance of God." Yet, though we should pray for bad 
princes, we ought not, therefore, to infer directly that their 
vices should not be punished like the crimes of robbers, for 
whom also we are ordered to pray; nor, if we are bound to 
obey a good, does it follow that we should not resist a bad 
prince? Besides, if you attend to the cause which induced 
Paul to commit these ideas to writing, you will find, I fear, 




72 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

hat this passage is greatly against you; since he wrote them 
o chastise the temerity of certain persons, who maintained that 
Christians ought not to be under the control of magistrates. 
For, since the magistrates were invested with authority on 
purpose to restrain wicked men, to enable us all to live under 
equal laws, and to exhibit a living example of divine justice, 
they contended that he was of no use among persons so uneon- 
taminated by the contagion of vice as to be a law to themselves. 
Paul, therefore, does not here treat of the magistrate, but of 
magistracy — that is, of the function and duty of the person 
who presides over others, nor of this nor of that species of 
magistracy, but of every possible form of government. Nor 
does he contend against those who maintained that bad magis- 
trates ought not to be punished, but against persons who re- 
nounced every kind of authority; who, by an absurd interpre- 
tation of Christian liberty, affirmed that it was an indignity to 
men emancipated by the Son of God, and directed by God's 
Spirit, to be controlled by any human power. To refute this 
erroneous opinion, Paul shows that magistracy is not only a 
good, but a sacred and divine ordinance, and instituted express- 
ly for connecting assemblages and communities of men, and to 
enable them, conjointly, to acknowledge God's blessings, and 
to abstain from mutual injuries. Persons raised to the rank of 
magistrates God has ordered to be the conservators of his laws: 
and, therefore, if we acknowledge laws to be, as they certainly 
are, good things, we must also acknowledge that their conser- 
vators are entitled to honour, and that their office is a good and 
useful institution. But the magistrate is terrible. To whom, 
I beseech you? To the good or to the bad? To the good he 
cannot be a terror, as he secures them from injury; but if he is 
a terror to the bad, it is nothing to you, who are directed by 
the Spirit of God. What occasion, then, is there, you will say, 
for subjecting me to the magistrate, since I am God's freeman? 
Much. To prove yourself God's freeman, obey his laws; for 
the.Spirit of God, of whose direction you boast, framed the 
laws, approves of magistracy and authorizes obedience to the 
magistrate. On this head, therefore we shall easily come to an 
agreement, that a magistrate is necessary in the best-constituted 
societies, and that he ought to be treated with every kind of 
respect. Hence, if any person entertains contrary sentiments, 
we deem him insane, intestable, and worthy of the severest 
punishment; since he openly resists God's will communicated 
to us in the Scriptures. For, supposing that no punishment 
for the violation of all laws, human and divine, should be in- 
flicted on a Caligula, a Nero, a Domitian, and other tyrants of 
that sort, you have here no countenance from Paul, who is 
discoursing of the power of magistrates and of bad men by 
whom it is badly exercised. Indeed, if you examine that kind 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 73 

of tyrants by Paul's rule, they will not at all be magistrates. 
[They indeed are not magistrates according to God's preceptive 
will, but only according to his providential permission.] Again, 
if you should contend that even bad princes are ordained by 
God, take care lest your language should be charged with cap- 
tiousness. For God, to counteract poison by poison, as an an- 
tidote, sometimes sets a bad man over bad men for their punish- 
ment; and yet, that God is the author of human wickedness, no 
man in his senses will dare to affirm, as none can be ignorant 
that the same God is the author of the punishments inflicted 
on the wicked."— De Jure Regni apud Scotos; by G. Buchanan, 
15. The disingenuousness and plausible sophistry of our op- 
ponents pointed out. This part of our duty is most painful, 
and yet, of all, the most necessary. No man desires to be re- 
garded by his fellow men as an Ishmaelite whose hand is 
against every man. But "the sounding of my bowels" for 
poor souls already snared, and the multitudes daily falling irre- 
coverably into the condemnation of the devil, impel me onward; 
and by the grace of God, what little of mental energy, or moral 
qualification, or influence among men, or worldly goods, may 
be committed to my stewardship, all, all, shall be sacrificed 
upon the altar of my God, and the public weal of my native 
land. The glory of God and the eternal salvation of immor- 
tal souls are interests not to be trifled with by the ministers of 
the Lord Jesus Christ, though nothing but fagots, and racks, 
and scaffolds should greet their vision, already dimmed, per- 
haps, by weeping day and night over the crimes and miseries 
of the human race. Let the man who has drunk nothing of 
this spirit cast this book from him, or commit it to the flames. 
Its perusal can do him no good. It will only aggravate his 
condemnation. But let the humble soul draw near and con- 
template the chambers of imagery, while we draw aside the 
gilded veil that conceals from common observation the abomi- 
nations of a proud, worldly, time-serving ministry, and an apos- 
tatizing people. "Son of man, seest thou what they do? Go 
in, and behold the wicked abominations that they do here. 
Hast thou seen what the ancients of the house of Israel do in the 
dark, every man in the chambers of his imagery? For they 
say the Lord seeth us not; the Lord hath forsaken the earth. 
They have filled the land with violence; therefore will I also 
deal in fury." Ezek. viii. 6, 9, 12, 17, 18. So, in our day, 
they say the Lord regards not the civil rulers of the land; he 
7 - 



74 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

has forsaken the earth. His law is not for kings and mighty 
men. Let it be obeyed by women, and children, and slaves, 
so far as may be necessary to secure us in the unmolested grati- 
fication of the lusts of the flesh! If our drunkenness, and 
gluttony, and whoredom, and gambling, and oppressions of the 
poor and fatherless be secure, all is well. If the professed mi- 
nisters of the Lord Jesus Christ will teach the people submission 
to the powers that be, that we are under no obligation to obey 
God's law, either as individuals or rulers, because we have no 
power to interfere in religious matters; and that church mem- 
bers must confer upon us political power because the church 
has nothing to do with politics; if these ministers in their holy 
horror of a union of church and state will cringe and fawn at 
our feet, and never open their lips against any iniquitous law 
which we may enact; if they will say nothing against popery, 
because we are indebted to papists for our elevation; nothing 
against slavery, because this is the source of our wealth; we 
will suffer them to exist in the land. They may profess to 
obey the laws of the Lord Jesus Christ, and may even go the 
length of enforcing obedience to those laws upon others, so far 
as it does not interfere with our liberty to sin; but if they re- 
quire us to obey, we will soon teach them better manners. 

We may notice three methods of prevalent delusion. 

1. Ambiguous language. Take, as a specimen, the language 
of a newly formed society in London, entitled "The British 
Anti-state Church Association." 

"That in matters of religion man is responsible to God alone; 
that all legislation by secular governments in affairs of religion 
is an encroachment upon the rights of man, and an invasion of 
the prerogatives of God; and that the application by law of the 
resources of the state to the maintenance of any form or forms 
of religious worship and instruction, is contrary to reason, hos- 
tile to human liberty, and directly opposed to the genius of 
Christianity. 

"That the object of this society be, — the liberation of religion 
from all governmental or legislative interference." 

It will be readily perceived that this is the almost univer- 
sally prevalent language of our countrymen. But let it be ob- 
served, 

(1.) While it is in part applicable to the Erastian establish- 
ments of Great Britain, and pronounces upon them a just con- 
demnation, it asserts a number of glaring and dangerous false* 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 75 

hoods. It is not true that in all matters of religion man is re- 
sponsible to God alone. It is not true that secular governments 
are prohibited from legislating concerning the affairs of religion. 
The very reverse of both these propositions is true, as we have 
clearly seen, pages 45—48. 

(2.) There is an artful and designed suppression of any al- 
lusion to the all-important difference that exists between the 
consideration of religion as internal and external to the church. 
The propositions are true in regard to the former, but totally 
false in regard to the latter. It was evidently intended by the 
authors of these propositions, that they should be taken without 
limitation; and they well knew that the ignorant mass would 
so receive them. Hence, every infidel and papist in the United 
States is boisterous and vehement in the utterance of these pro- 
positions, the former with the design of overthrowing all re- 
ligion, the latter to effect the establishment of Romanism. 
The propositions are the imbodiment of atheism, such heresy 
and such false religion as ought to be suppressed by every good 
government, because it denies the just authority of civil rulers, 
and must of necessity aim a malignant blow at the corner-stone 
of the social edifice. 

2. Designed deception is another prevalent trick. We have 
seen this in the London society. It would be well if such dis- 
honesty were confined to politicians, but it exists in the church. 
It has been common to charge the witnesses of Christ with 
giving to the magistrate too much power circa sacra, and then 
apply the language which they have used in reference to the 
external affairs of the church, to its internal concerns. By this 
easy process the multitude are led blindfold to destruction. 
This was the method used to induce, first, the General Assembly 
in the United States, afterwards the Associate Reformed church, 
to mutilate the Westminster Confession of Faith; and more 
recently about one-half of the Reformed Presbyterian church, 
to depart from the principles of that Confession.* And this is 
the method now used for drawing the Associate Presbyterian 
church into apostacy, with how much success a little time will 
demonstrate. 

* How easily do men vibrate from one extreme to another. From the 
work of straining the Confession, as we think, to an undue exaltation of the, 
magistrate's power, they have rushed to the opposite extreme, and are now 
ready to go we know not what length. 



7ti DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

3. Ascribing to the Confession the Erastian principles and 
persecuting tenets of the seventeenth century, against which its 
framers and adherents protested and suffered. This is slander- 
ous, as will more fully appear upon an examination of the Con- 
fession. 

4. Charging the Confession with the taint of popery, inti- 
mating that it requires the civil magistrate to inflict civil pains 
for ecclesiastical offences. But we shall see that the Confession 
points out the only remedy against popery. 

16. We have now endeavoured to place before the reader 
the great outlines of the magistrate's power circa sacra, as we 
find that power revealed and enforced in the holy Scriptures. 
We have employed all the human helps within our reach; we 
are certain that we fully agree, if not in every shade and particu- 
lar, yet in the great outlines, with the Confession. The subject 
is acknowledged to be as difficult as it is important. Many 
more scriptures might be adduced, many more testimonies of 
eminent men might be given, but we fear the danger of per- 
plexing honest minds. Our desire is to enlighten the humble 
inquirer after truth, and it is hoped that those who may differ 
from us will not lose any thing by an attentive perusal of these 
pages. Those who have leisure and opportunity are referred 
to "Aaron's Rod Blossoming,"— "Lea? Rex" by Rutherford,-— 
" De jure regni apud Scotos" — "The Secession Testimony con- 
sistent with Liberty of Conscience," by Rev. James Morrison, 
published in the Religious Monitor, vol. x. p. 373; vol. xi. pp. 
22, 71.* "Testimony of Original Seceders," recognised as 
orthodox by a resolution of the Associate Synod. "Answers 
to Reasons of Protest by Rev, Messrs. Donan, Wilson, and Blair, 
drawn up by the late Rev. Thomas Allison, and published by 
the Associate Synod." "Letters on the 23d chapter of the 
Confession of Faith, by William Cunningham, D. B." 

We conclude, then, that the venerable Westminster Confes- 
sion of Faith contains the clearest, the most scriptural statement 
of the doctrine of the magistrate's power circa sacra that has 
ever been drawn up by the individual or combined ingenuity 
of man; that all attempts to make it better have hitherto proved 
abortive; that all the alterations which have been made are 
seen to be erroneous; that it was given to the church by the 

* This article was contributed by the late Rev. David Carson, who was 
elected to the professorship a short time previous to his death. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 77 

most signal interposition of Divine Providence since the apos- 
tolic days; that it is the best human defence against Romanism 
which has been given to the church, or the world; that any al- 
teration such as is now proposed effectually opens the door for 
the encroachments of popery through the power of the civil 
magistrate; that its views on magistracy are more needed now 
than at any former period, because our liberties are not now 
endangered by giving the magistrate too much power circa sacra. 
the only thing objected against the Confession; but they are 
endangered by a refusal to give him sufficient power for the 
preservation of liberty; and, finally, that it is the combined 
spirit of infidelity and popery, under a protestant name, that 
demands the mutilation of this venerable document, which God 
gave to his church, which she received with unspeakable joy. 
teaching its principles in mighty perils, watering them with 
tears, sanctifying them by fervent prayers, and sealing thern 
with their blood. 

The spirit of infidelity is the same, arrives at the same result, 
produces the same practical fruit, whether it make its way up 
through the hierarchy of Rome and thunder its anathemas from 
the Vatican; or, whether creeping from the stews, the theatres, 
the bar-rooms, the political forums of populous towns, and the 
ballot-boxes of democracy, diffusing itself through the mighty 
mass, heaving up the dregs of society from their depths to the 
surface, as if by the convulsive throes of an earthquake, till 
its voice is heard like the sound of many waters, we will not have 
this man to reign over us; or, whether it perch itself on the 
pinnacle of proud reason's temple, with blasphemy inscribed on 
the left, we will crush the wretch, and holding the sword bathed 
in human blood in the right hand, menacing death to nations; 
or, whether it come whining a false charity and spurious bro- 
therly love, out from the lips of a time-serving ministry, which 
has found its way into protestant pulpits, — it is the same. 
Knowing that God has commanded the nations, to "kiss the 
Son," — that magistracy is his ordinance to protect and sup- 
port the church, without which she can never prevail through- 
out the world, that nations who are not for Christ, must 
be against him, infidels and papists, and nominal protestants 
coalesce and join the universal chorus in most loving bro- 
therhood. Satan, having swayed the sword of the Roman 
beast and his ten horns, the modern kingdoms of Europe, by 

7* 



?S DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

means of the false prophet of Mohammedanism and the scarlet 
coloured woman, the apostate church of Rome, to crush true 
religion, by perverting magistracy into a tool of Romish per- 
secution, now finding the world beginning to grow weary of 
these long oppressions, has changed his ground, and is causing 
his vassals to raise the shout from all lands, — "-no church and 
state," — "liberate religion from all governmental or legislative 
interference:" So that Rome may not be hindered by protes- 
tant states in the performance of her last act in the bloody 
drama; and all this, too, at the very moment in which she is 
wielding the sword of the civil magistrate to cut down every 
germ of liberty that still lingers upon European soil. 

II. Whether the Westminster Confession of Faith harmonize 
with the Holy Scriptures in reference to the magistrate's power 
and duty concerning religion? 

Having presented an outline of this doctrine, drawn as is be- 
lieved directly from the scriptures, it is now proper to consider 
what the Confession actually teaches, answer the arguments of 
opponents, and consider the vote of certain ecclesiastical bo- 
dies, to alter the Confession, with a view to bring about a visible 
organic union with each other. 

1. What does the Westminster Confession actually teach on 
the important point before us? That there may be no room for 
evasion on the part either of its friends or enemies, the whole of 
its language, which has been objected to, is here transcribed. 

Chapter XX. Sec. 3, 4. 

"They who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, do practise any .sin, or 
cherish any lust, do thereby destroy the end of Christian liberty; which 
is, that, being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve 
the Lord without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all the 
days, of our life. 

" And because the powers which God hath ordained, and the liberty 
which Christ hath purchased, are not intended by God to destroy, but 
mutually to uphold and preserve one another; they who, upon pretence 
of Christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful power, or the lawful exercise 
of it, whether it be civil or ecclesiastical, resist the ordinance of God. 
And for the publishing of such opinions, or maintaining of such practices, 
as are contrary to the light of nature, or to the known principles of Chris- 
tianity, whether concerning faith* worship, or conversation; or to the 
power of godliness; or such erroneous opinions or practices, as either in 
their own nature, or in the manner of publishing or maintaining them, are 
destructive to the EXTERNAL peace and order which Christ hath estab- 
lished in the church; they may lawfully be called to account, and pro- 
ceeded against by the censures of the chuferwand by the power of the 
civil magistrate," 



DIVINE AND HUMAN EIGHTS. 79 

Chapter XXIII. Sec. 3. 
"The civil magistrate may not assume to himself the administration of 
the word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of the kingdom of 
heaven: yet he hath authority, and it is his duty, to take order, that unity 
and peace be preserved in the church, that the truth of God be kept pure 
and entire, that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed', all corruptions 
and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed, and all the 
ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed. For the 
better effecting whereof, he hath power to call synods, to be present at 
them, and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according 
to the mind of God." 

Chapter XXXI. Sec. 1, 2. 

"For the better government, and farther edification of the church, there 
ought to be such assemblies as are commonly ealled Synods or Councils. 

"As magistrates may lawfully call a synod of ministers, and other fit 
persons, to consult and advise with about matters of religion; so if ma- 
gistrates be open enemies to the church, the ministers of Christ, of them- 
selves, by virtue of their office, or they, with otber fit persons, upon dele- 
gation from their churches, may meet together in such assemblies." 

Adopting Act. 
"But, lest our intention and meaning be in some particulars misunder- 
stood, it is hereby expressly declared and provided, That the not men- 
tioning in this Confession the several sorts of ecclesiastical officers and 
assemblies, shall be no prejudice to the truth of Christ in these particulars, 
to be expressed fully in the Directory of Government. It is farther de- 
clared, That the Assembly understandeth some parts of the second article 
of the thirty-first chapter only of kirks not settled, or constituted in point 
of government: And that although, in such kirks, a synod of Ministers, 
and other fit persons, may be called by the Magistrate's authority and 
nomination, without any other call, to consult and advise with about mat- 
ters of religion; and although, likewise, the ministers of Christ, without 
delegation from their churches, may, of themselves, and by virtue of their 
office, meet together synodically in such kirks not yet constituted, yet 
neither of these ought to be done in kirks constituted and settled; it being 
always free to the Magistrate to advise with synods of ministers and ruling 
elders, meeting upon delegation from their churches, either ordinarily, or, 
being indicted by his authority, occasionally, and pro re nata: it being^ 
also free to assemble together synodically, as well pro re nata as at the 
ordinary times, upon delegation from the churches, by the intrinsical 
power received from Christ, as often as it is necessary for the good of the 
Church, so to assemble, in case the Magistrate, to the detriment of the 
church, withhold or deny his consent; the necessity of occasional assem- 
blies being first [to] remonstrate unto him by humble supplication." 

Let us now consider these principles with candour, and com- 
pare them with those advanced in the first part of this publica- 
tion. 

(1.) Of the twentieth chapter. 1. The 2x1 section defines 
liberty of conscience. " In matters of faith and worship " God 
is the only Lord of conscience; of course every man must be 
left to the dictates of his own conscience in regard to the kind 
of religious belief and worship which God requires in his word. 
Magistrates may judge nothing, establish nothing in this respect; 
hut this doth not hinder them from giving a legal sanction to 



8° DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

any creed or form of worship, first adopted by any number of 
their subjects, which violates no precept of the law of nature. 
Therefore, — 2. The third section denies liberty of conscience to 
"practise any sin, or cherish any lust." Consequently, the 
public practice of sin, (as the Reformers every where with 
united voice confine the magistrate's power to the public acts 
of men,) is not permitted under the plea of liberty of conscience. 
The magistrate, then, is bound to suppress every public trans- 
gression of the ten commandments. 3. The fourth section as- 
serts the mutual harmony and dependence of liberty and 
good government. United they stand, separated, both fall. 
Men may neither publish nor practise any thing contrary to 
the law of nature, concerning either " the known principles of 
Christianity," that is, principles known by this natural law 
to be repugnant to Christianity; such as atheism, idolatry, and 
blasphemy; or,concerning" faith, worship,or conversation;" that 
is, every thing which men may do concerning 6 faith, worship, 5 
&c. must be according to the law of nature; if not, the magis- 
trate must restrain them; or concerning "the external power of 
godliness;" that is, men must observe a sound morality in all 
their public acts, (Tit. i. 16;) or, in one word, whatsoever may 
be "destructive to the external peace and order of 
the church," the magistrate is bound to suppress. These 
things may be "proceeded against by the censures of the 
church, and the power of the civil magistrate." 

These principles are denied by those who desire the altera- 
tion of this chapter. They object that this chapter gives to the 
church and the magistrate a joint or concurrent jurisdiction. So 
it does, and so it should do, in relation to the public conduct of 
men, and a denial of this doctrine is abominable atheism. We 
challenge the w T orld to prove that men areexempt from obedience 
to the law of nature in any relation, or to prove that the church 
and state are not both required, each in its appropriate sphere, 
to enforce obedience to that law. Come on then, ye mutilaters 
of the testimony which your fathers gave to the truth of God's 
word, let us hear your strong reasons, or cast aside the axes and 
hammers which you have already lifted up to break down the 
carved work of God's sanctuary. 

But that we may not be chargeable with unfairness, we will 
let our opponents speak for themselves. The Rev. Wm. Wilson, 
the master spirit of the present apostacy, thus analyzes the 4th 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 81 

section of the 20th chapter, and condemns every item, except 
the first: — 

" Verily, none have suffered more from the power here conceded to 
the Civil Magistiate than Covenanters: none have lifted their testimony 
more pointedly against it; and none should be more willing to have the 
last vestige of it expunged from the Confession of the Church of God, 
from civil constitutions, laws, and magistratical action circa sacra. 
throughout all the nations of the earth. And we have it here affirmed: 

" 1. That 'because the powers which God hath ordained, and the liber- 
ty which Christ hath purchased, are not intended by God to destroy, but 
mutually to uphold and preserve one another; they who, upon pretence 
of Christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful power, or the lawful exercise 
of it, whether it be civil or ecclesiastical, resist the ordinance of God.' 
This is most excellent doctrine, (a) 

" 2. ' And ' that ' for their publishing of such opinions, or maintaining 
of such practices, as are contrary to the light of nature, whether con- 
cerning faith, worship, or conversation; they may lawfully be called 
to account, and proceeded against by the censures of the church, and by 
the power of the Civil Magistrate.' (6) 

"3. That ' for their publishingof such opinions, or maintaining of such 
practices, as are contrary to the known principles of Christianity, whe- 
ther concerning faith, worship, or conversation; they may lawfully be 
called to account, and proceeded against by the censures of the church, 
and by the power of the Civil Magistrate.' (c) 

"4. That 'for their publishingof such opinions, or maintaining of such 
practices, as are contrary to the power of godliness; they may lawfully 
be called to account, and proceeded against by the censures of the church, 
and by the power of the Civil Magistrate.' (d) 

" 5. ' Or ' for • such erroneous opinions or practices, as either in their 
own nature, or in the manner of publishing or maintaining them, are de- 
structive to the external peace and order which Christ hath established 
in the church; they may lawfully be called to account, and proceeded against 
by the censures of the church', and by the power &f the Civil Magis- 
trate." (e) Missionary Advocate, pp, 244, 245. 

(a.) Why not let it remain, and interpret the remainder of 
the section in consistency with it? You very properly require 
us to interpret the Bible in this way, and even your own wri- 
tings. If you allege that it is irreconcilable, we reply that such 
an allegation is a calumny upon its authors, upon your own 
church, and upon almost all the Reformers. 

(b.) Well, then, the magistrate must not proceed against men 
for published opinions and public practices contrary to the law 
of nature! So says Thomas Paine, Voltaire, &c. &c. So says 
Governor Steele of New Hampshire, in the year 1845; who has 
officially "objected to prayer in public schools, or any where 
else publicly," — that " prayer on public occasions is solemn 
mockery,"— and has challenged the "whole world to show the 
utility of public prayer, or prove it a duty under any cir- 
cumstances." This impious man has also discharged a teacher 
of one of the public schools merely because he would not abarw 



82 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

don public prayer! Here is that liberty of conscience which 
grows out of the doctrine of refusing magistrates authority to 
suppress sins against the law of nature ! Covenanters are plead- 
ing for this doctrine! — pro pudor! But when men begin a 
course of apostacy they need not expect to stop this side of athe- 
ism; for says Jehovah, " if ye walk contrary to me, 1 will walk 
contrary to you." We ask Mr. Wilson, and his hopeful labour- 
ers in the same cause, whether the civil law ought to suppress 
the " heresy" and " false religion" of Governor Steele or not ? 
The light of nature teaches the duty of public prayer, which 
heathen nations acknowledge and practise. 

(c.) The magistrate shall enjoin and enforce upon his subjects 
atheism, idolatry, blasphemy, &c. ! No, says Mr. W., he shall 
only permit these things. But the Spirit of God says other- 
wise, as we have seen; for if the magistrate permit, the majori- 
ty will soon enforce them. We prefer a better guide than Mr. 
Wilson. 

(d.) So it seems that magistrates may not enforce a sound pub- 
lic morality. They must tolerate public atheism, idolatry, blas- 
phemy, desecration of the Sabbath, parental disobedience, vio- 
lence, stews, theatres, gambling, men-stealing, perjury, &c; for 
the external power of godliness consists in the suppression of 
these, as well as other sins. 

(e.) So then the magistrate may not punish crimes destruc- 
tive to the existence of the church of God on earth! We will 
not disgust ourselves or our readers by pursuing farther the 
sickening details of this apostate Covenanter. 

2. Of the twenty-third chapter. 1. The first section teaches 
that all civil government is from God as the supreme, moral 
governor of the world. 2. The second section authorizes Chris- 
tians to hold office under a lawful form of government, — re- 
quires the magistrate to make the wholesome laws of the com- 
monwealth the rule of his administration, not his arbitrary will, 
— and permits necessary defensive war. 3. The third section 
prohibits the magistrate from any, the least, interference in the 
internal affairs of the church, — but it requires him to maintain 
outward peace in the church, — to take such order as may be 
competent to his office, that the word of God be kept pure and 
entire, which requires the magistrate to do the things pre- 
scribed in the twentieth chapter, and which need not be re- 
peated, to correct such "abuses in worship, discipline," &c, to 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 83 

suppress heresy, against the light of nature, as explained above, 
pp # 45 — 48,— to correct such abuses in worship, and disci- 
pline, as violate the acknowledged principles which the church 
had adopted, so far as such violations affect the social rights of 
the parties. But it is inquired, why does not the Confession 
<rive this explanation? We answer it does so, in many places, 
particularly in the twentieth chapter — and in the first clause of 
this very section, the explanation is made. The substance of 
this section is simply this, — The magistrate may not assume 
to prescribe the doctrine, ordinances, government or discipline 
of the church; but must take order that those whose duty it is 
to wait upon these things, do them according to their judgment 
of the mind of God, while he is bound to suppress public 
blasphemies and heresies against the law which he administers; 
and all public hinderances which may be thrown in the way 
of church officers, according to his judgment of those things, 
which is also according to the mind of God. This section 
does not define the law; that had been done, in the nineteenth 
and twentieth chapters; but, it does define the respective powers 
of magistracy and the ministry, each acting in their appropriate 
sphere, according to the mind of God. No other view can be 
maintained, without a violation of common sense — established 
rules of criticism, and without accusing the framers of the 
Confession with contradiction. This has ever been the mean- 
ing affixed to it, by its framers and adherents, and by the Asso- 
ciate church. It needs no other explanation. It needs no 
alteration, especially none such as this generation are prepared 
to make. Should it be altered by the light of the millennium, 
the alteration will be different, in spirit and meaning, from 
the schemes of this present age. The world never has been, 
nor is it yet, prepared to receive the grand and immutable doc- 
trines of this Confession. But the magistrate must also take 
order, that those who adopt an ecclesiastical organization shall 
abide by their own voluntary engagements to each other, so far 
as temporalities are concerned; or, rather, that they shall settle, 
administer, and observe in an orderly manner those ordinances 
which they voluntarily adopted, and solemnly covenanted with 
God and with each other to maintain. But in order to ascer- 
tain what are the ordinances of God, to which he is bound 
to give protection, and suppress all such outward hostility as 
might prevent their observance, he must take the decisions of 



84 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

ecclesiastical bodies themselves; and when there is no such 
organized body or bodies in his dominions, it is his duty to call 
the ministers and other suitable persons to organize, and settle 
those matters; and he may be present, as he always is by his 
law, so personally, if he judge his presence necessary for the 
preservation of the public good; he is sometimes present, per- 
sonally, even in this country, to prevent religious furiosos from 
beating out each other's brains. If he should refuse to be thus 
present, the church could not long exist in any country. But 
he is to see that " whatsoever is transacted" in such synods 
"be according to the mind of God." Is he to judge whether the 
creed, or the form of worship which they may adopt, be accord- 
ing to the mind of God? We answer, no. This is denied again 
and again in the Confession. Why then assert it? But he is 
to see that it be according to the mind of God, as it applies to 
his official conduct — that no precept of the law of nature be 
transgressed, — that his prerogatives be not infringed, — that the 
rights of others be respected and secured, &c. He is the judge 
of the requirements of natural law for the preservation of social 
order. Synods are the judges of natural law for the mainte- 
nance of the outward purity and order of the church. See the 
adopting act, as quoted above, which limits this power of calling 
synods. If this power had been denied to magistrates by the re- 
formers, the reformation would have proved nearly abortive; 
the church had never enjoyed the benefit of the Confession, or 
Presbyterian church government, or even our Shorter Cate- 
chism. 4. Section fourth removes the obligation of obedience 
from the character of the magistrate, and places it upon the right- 
eousness of the laws which he administers, and declares the sub- 
jection of all ecclesiastical persons to the magistrate's lawful au- 
thority. This is a corner-stone in the temple of liberty, laid by 
the fidelity of Christ's witnesses in troublous times, which is 
destined to remain while sun and moon endure. 

3. Of the thirty-first chapter. This chapter contemplates a 
disorganized state of affairs both in church and state, as does 
also that part of the third section of the twenty-third chapter, 
which authorizes magistrates to call synods. 1. This section 
asserts merely that there ought to be ecclesiastical assemblies 
in the church. 2. That, if in such circumstances the magis- 
trate refuse to do his duty, the ministers of Christ, by virtue of 
their ofiice, when they have no regular organization with each 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 85 

other, may assemble, organize, and settle the affairs of the church. 
But neither magistrates nor ministers may do these things in 
a settled state of affairs. The adopting act solves every diffi- 
culty which has been, or can be, raised against the Confession. 

But our opponents are resolved to fasten upon the Confession 
all the Erastian acts of the British parliament at that period, 
and subsequently. They might as well charge Paul with all 
the tyranny of Nero, because he appealed to Csesar for personal 
protection. 

Again, it is said the Westminster Assembly contended for 
uniformity of religion throughout the three kingdoms, and that 
the magistrate should enforce this uniformity. That they con- 
tended for uniformity in the use of all lawful and scriptural 
means is true; but that they required the magistrate to enforce 
this uniformity is such a libel upon history as can delude only 
the very ignorant. They did require the magistrate to enforce 
conformity to the light of nature upon all his subjects, to abo- 
lish idolatry, and consequently to extirpate popery and prelacy, 
as utterly subversive of liberty. And here they made an im- 
portant distinction between popery and English prelacy. They 
required the total extirpation of popery; and the extirpation 
of prelacy in Scotland, as odious to the nation: they denied 
the right of the magistrate to enforce prelacy upon the people 
against their will; as they did the right of the magistrate to force 
any creed, or form of worship, or ecclesiastical order, upon 
people against their will, in any circumstances. 3. Concerning 
the third and fourth sections we are not aware of any contro- 
versy. 4. The fifth section prohibits ecclesiastical courts from 
intermeddling with civil affairs; but they may petition, may 
advise the magistrate when required, &c. Here we might ob- 
serve, that the enemies of the Confession, in order to be consist- 
ent, ought to strike out that part of this section which prohibits 
the church from intermeddling with the affairs of the common- 
wealth, or they should unite with Erastians and prohibit the 
church from inflicting ecclesiastical censure upon disobedience 
to parents, violence, adultery, theft, or perjury. Are not these 
crimes against the state? Does not the church encroach upon 
the magistrate's power by taking cognizance of these crimes? 
Who will say yes to this question? and yet the mode of rea- 
soning by which the magistrate is charged with Erastianism, 



S6 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

because he enforces an external obedience to the first table of 
the law, would require an affirmative answer to be given. 

The writer already cited is no less displeased with this sec- 
tion than with the others, although it has escaped the mutilating 
process of the General Assembly, and of the Associate Re- 
formed Synod, already noticed. He delivers himself on this 
wise: — 

" This section has not been modified by the General Assembly of this 
country, nor by the Associate Reformed Church. The others have, 
It needs amendment as well as they. They are all of one family. The 
two former propositions are the least exceptionable in their doctrine: yet 
it has been used, by the civil Magistrate, as an argument furnished by 
her own Confession, against the Church of Scotland, in her recent at- 
tempts to throw off the grievous yoke of patronage: which is regarded as 
a civil affair, (a) The doctrine of the third proposition no enlightened 
Christian now believes. Far different ought to be the attitude of the 
Church of God, from that of crouching before the throne with her hum> 
blb petition. Even the pro re nata community, in contrariety to 
this, which they still profess to hold with peculiar tenacity, as it is in 
the Confession, decided, at their meeting in Allegheny city, 1840, that 
thus to petition the civil power would be inconsistent with the character 
of the church. (6) The doctrine of the fourth is of a piece with the 
others, which provide that the magistrate may call synods; and all that 
has been said in relation to them, in this matter, with equal force 
applies to it. For to require is to demand, to ask with authority. 
The civil magistrate has no such power over, or with respect to, eccle- 
siastical courts. It ought therefore to be amended." (c) — Missionary 
Advocate, p. 279. 

(a) Who does not know that Sir James Graham's argument, 
here alluded to, is based on the Erastian law of patronage, and 
not on the language of the Confession? Take away the law 
of patronage, which the Confession condemns every where, by 
teaching principles totally incompatible with its existence, and 
who does not see that there could be no place left for Sir 
James' argument? 

(6) Who does not know that the pro re nata community, as 
the Reformed Presbyterian church is here sneeringly styled 
]»y one of her recreant sons, refuses to recognise the lawful- 
ness of the government of the United States, and that they 
would not object to petition a lawful government. But those 
who believe our government valid, in regard to lawful com- 
mands, as do all the denominations represented in the con- 
vention of Reformed churches, can have no objection to exer- 
cise the right of petition. We ardently hope that all the 
genuine friends of the Confession may soon see eye to eye on 
this, as on all other points. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 87 

(c.) Why may not the civil magistrate, not only request, but 
even demand of the church, a solution of any case of conscience 
which may perplex him in regard either to his private or offi- 
cial conduct? Is not the church Christ's witness for this very 
purpose, among others? Let some reason be given, before we 
entertain this sweeping condemnation of the Confession, be- 
yond any thing which has yet been ventured, by any denomi- 
nation of Presbyterians, even the most lax. It seems as though 
the enemies of the Confession were bent on denying the power 
of the magistrate, even to protect the true religion, that he may 
have power given him to support immorality, or any false re- 
ligion, or heresy, that may be clearly condemned by the law of 
nature. Such is actually the existing state of things among us; 
and yet professing Christians, while denying any power to the 
government in reference to religion, are striving who shall 
throw their caps the highest, and shout the loudest hosannas to 
a government exercising all its power to enforce immorality, 
and protect heresy and false religion, which are a flagrant vio- 
lation of nature's law! 

2. What does the testimony of the Associate church teach 
on this subject? 

«* 14. We declare our adherence to the whole doctrine contained in the 
Confession of Faith and Catechisms agreed upon by the Assembly of Di- 
vines at Westminster, with commissioners from the church of Scotland, and 
received by said church. And we, being a branch of that church, and still 
having an immediate connexion with our brethren in that country, (the 
ministers and people belonging to the Associate Synod,) do join with them 
in the testimony they maintain for the doctrine expressed in the said Con- 
fession and Catechisms, for the divine right of Presbyterial church go- 
vernment; for the spiritual privileges of the church, particularly this, That 
it is not bound to acknowledge any other head than Christ, or any other 
law than his ; for the warrantableness and perpetual obligation of the co- 
venant-engagements, which the church of Scotland came under, to abide 
by the principles of the reformation* And likewise we join with them in 
adhering to the testimonies of those, who, during former times of apostacy 
and during the persecutions which have formerly raged in Scotland, wit- 
nessed and suffered for the truth; so far as these testimonies had the 
maintenance of the principles of the reformation, which we profess, for 
their leading design. 

" 15. We judge it necessary, however, in professing our adherence to the, 
Westminster Confession, to declare, as our brethren in Scotland have 
done, our mind concerning the civil magistrate in matters of religion, more 
particularly than that Confession does. 

"We do, therefore, assert, that, as the kingdom of Christ is spiritual, 
acknowledging no other laws, and no other rulers than he has appointed 
in it, so the civil magistrate, as such, is no ruler in the Church of Christ; 
and has no right to interfere in the administration of its government. He 
is bound to improve every opportunity which his high station and exten- 



88 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

sive influence may give him, for promoting the faith of Christ, for opposing 
the enemies of this faith, for supporting and encouraging true godliness, 
and for discouraging whatever in principle or practice is contrary to it. 
But to accomplish these ends, it is not warrantable for him to use any 
kind of violence either towards the life, the property, or the consciences 
of men: He ought not to punish any as heretics or schismatics; nor ought 
he to grant any privileges to those whom he judges professors of the true 
religion, which may hurt others in their natural rights; his whole duty, as 
a magistrate, respects men, not as Christians, but as members of civil 
society. The appointed means for promoting the kingdom of Christ are 
all of a spiritual nature. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, 
but spiritual, and mighty, not through the force of human laws, compel- 
ling men to do that which they dislike, but, through God, by his almighty 
power and grace, making the obstinate and rebellious yield a cheerful 
submission to it. 

" 16. If any article of our Confession of Faith seems to give any other 
power to the civil magistrate, in matters of religion, than what we have now 
declared to be competent to him, we are to be considered as receiving it 
only in so far as it agrees with other articles of the same Confession, in 
which the spiritual nature of the church is asserted, and the keys of the 
kingdom of heaven denied to belong to the civil magistrate; and in so far 
as it agrees with this declaration of our principles. 

" 17. We maintain, with the Westminster Assembly, that God alone is 
the Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and com- 
mandments of men; and declare that no man possesses a right to compel 
those who are under his civil authority, to worship God contrary to the 
dictates of their own conscience. This freedom from compulsion, whether 
it be called privilege, liberty, or right, cannot be denied to men, under 
any pretence whatsoever, unless we adopt the principle, that men should 
serve God, not according to their own conscience, but according to the will 
or conscience of those who are over them, in power or authority. Yet this 
right cannot be pleaded in behalf of principles or practices destructive to 
civil society; therefore the civil magistrate does not go beyond the limits 
prescribed to him, when he lays those under restraint who teach that it is 
their duty to destroy the lives of such as they judge heretics; that they are 
not obliged to fulfil promises made to persons, whom they consider in that 
light; and that they may lawfully break their oaths, if they obtain a dis- 
pensation for this purpose from the pope of Rome. The safety of society 
renders it necessary to guard against persons of this description, not be- 
cause they are of a false religion, but because they are enemies to the 
rights of mankind, and would use their liberty to destroy that of other 
people. Thus the magistrate, in discharging his duty to civil society, is 
often the instrument, in the hand of God, for protecting his church from 
the fury of persecuting enemies. 

" 18. The civil magistrate not only may, but ought to restrain those 
vices which are destructive to civil society, and for which none can plead 
as what they are bound in conscience to practise, seeing the light of na- 
ture testifies against them: he ought to be a terror to evil doers, and a 
praise to them who do well. Thus the proper exercise of his office is, in 
its consequence, beneficial to the church. 

"19. It is the duty of Christians, plainly and frequently enjoined 
upon them in the word of God, and acknowledged in the Confession of 
all the reformed churches, to submit to the government of that country in 
which Providence has ordered their lot. The civil magistrate, being an 
infidel, or of what we judge a false religion, does not, as our Confession 
most justly declares, free us from an obligation to acknowledge his autho- 
rity, and to obey him in all lawful commands. Civil societies may, and 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 89 

ought to preserve their rights and liberties; and to them it belongs to set 
up those forms of government, and those magistrates, whom they judge 
most proper. It is a sad truth, that in doing so, nations frequently neg- 
lect to acknowledge God, and give things injurious to religion a place in 
their civil constitutions. Against these evils, Christians ought to testify, 
as the Lord gives them opportunity. But they ought, by no means, on 
account of such blemishes in any government established by the con- 
sent of a nation, to refuse submission to it in all lawful commands, espe- 
cially while it grants the same protection to them as to the other members 
of the community. 

" 20. As we acknowledge that it was not only lawful, but highly ex- 
pedient, for the church of Scotland to enter into the most solemn engage- 
ments, as she did in the National Covenant, and in the Solemn League 
and Covenant of the three nations, to abide by the doctrine taught, and the 
order established, in that church, to study the preservation of the reformed 
religion, the removing of those corruptions and disorders which hindered 
its progress, and the uniting of its friends in the same profession of the 
faith, and to study that purity of life and conversation which becometh the 
gospel, so we acknowledge these engagements to be still binding on us. 
Not that we judge every thing in the manner of covenanting, used by the 
church of Scotland in former times, a proper example for us to follow, or 
that we may judge the form of words they used still binding as an oath 
upon us. As to what may be called the civil part of these covenants, it 
is what we neither have, nor ever had any thing to do with. — Nothing of 
that kind has a place in the bond which our brethren in Scotland use in 
covenanting; they judged it improper to mix civil and religious matters in 
such covenants, and we are of the same mind with them. 

" 21. But, that we may not be chargeable with deceiving, either the world* 
or one another, by a general profession of adherence to these engagements 
of our ancestors, not explained: — 

" (1.) We do more particularly declare, that, as our ancestors engaged to 
hold fast and defend the doctrine received by them, and by the other 
churches of the reformation, against those who were at that time its most 
remarkable enemies in Britain, namely, the Papists and others, whose zeal 
for Episcopal power, and for superstitious ceremonies, together with their 
persecuting spirit, made them be justly considered as enemies to the re- 
formation; so the same engagements lie on us to hold fast and defend the 
same truth, against all who do now, or afterward may oppose it, in that 
part of the world where we live. 

" (2.) We declare, that as our ancestors engaged to study the preserva- 
tion, the purity, and the increase of the church of Christ in Britain ; so the 
same engagements lie on us to study the preservation, the purity, and the 
increase of the church of Christ in the United States of North America, 
or wherever Providence may order our lot. 

•J (3.) We declare, that as our ancestors engaged to assist each other in 
maintaining the cause of Christ against its adversaries; to study personal 
reformation; and to perform the duties incumbent on them, as members of 
civil society, towards superiors, inferiors, or equals; so the same engage- 
ments lie on us to walk, in all these respects, worthy the vocation where- 
with we are called. 

" (4.) Finally, we declare, that it is our duty, relying on the grace that is 
in Christ Jesus, to engage jointly in a public solemn covenant, as our ances- 
tors did, to endeavour a faithful performance of these and all other duties 
which the word of God requires; especially of thos^ duties which men are 
most apt to neglect, or, through fear of reproach, and hurt to their worldly 
interests, to be deterred from. 

il 22* Our brethren in Scotland justly reckoned it an absurdity to swear 

8'* 



90 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

these covenants as framed in a former period of the church, and full of refe- 
rences to persons and circumstances which do not now exist. They renewed 
them in a bond suited to the time and situation in which they were placed. 
In doing so, they followed the example of the church of Scotland in times 
of its greatest purity. The national covenant had been several times re- 
newed, but always in a bond suited to the circumstances of the church, 
and the mercies and judgments passing over it, at the particular time when 
such engagements were entered into; but the matter and design being still 
the same in the chief articles of all these bonds, each of them was very 
properly called a renewing of the first solemn covenant of the Reformed 
Church of Scotland. 

" 23. The engagements which are binding on a church are binding on all 
the members of it. The circumstance of their being gathered out of different 
nations can make no difference. Whatever w T as the duty of Christians in 
Britain, is the duty of Christians all over the world, whenever the Lord 
calls them to it, and gives them an opportunity to perform it. No church 
can make that a duty, by engaging in solemn covenant to do it, which was 
not a duty before. We must not add to what the Lord has commanded, 
nor is the uttermost of what we can do in serving him, more than is re- 
quired of us. Thus our covenant engagements, as already stated, being 
nothing more than what the Lord requires of every one, and nothing more 
than what all who confess the name of Jesus in sincerity and truth, do 
materially acknowledge to be a duty; so every one, of whatsoever nation 
he be, who joins himself to that particular church which owns them as 
binding upon it, comes under the same engagements with his brethren, 
though he may not have an opportunity of declaring this in public cove- 
nanting." 

1. Section fourteenth declares our adherence to the whole 
doctrine of the Confession, as received by the adopting act, 
quoted above — the exclusive headship of Christ over his church 
— the warrantableness and perpetual obligation of covenant en- 
gagements, — and adherence to the testimonies of those who had 
witnessed and suffered for the truth, so far as set forth in the 
Confession. 

2. Section fifteenth declares our principles concerning the 
power of the civil magistrate more particularly than the Con- 
fession does, and contains a true and lucid explanation of the 
Confession ; it requires magistrates to promote the faith of Christ, 
and oppose its enemies; while it denies their right to use force 
to establish religion ; but here is no testimony against the Confes- 
sion, as is now asserted. Indeed, the Associate church has been 
a most contemptible body of men, if she has for more than one 
hundred years been binding her ministers and people to " the 
whole doctrine" of a Confession, against which she has at the 
same time been testifying. 

3. Section sixteenth guards against a perverted and unfair 
exposition of the Confession, by forcing upon it a contradictory 
construction. " If any article/' taken apart "seems" &c. it is to 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 91 

be qualified, by other expressions used in immediate connexion, 
or elsewhere. 

4. Section seventeenth declares true liberty of conscience, — 
and requires the suppression of Romanism, not indeed formally^ 
because it is a false religion, but because it is such a false reli- 
gion as disregards and invades the rights of others. So with 
the Confession, it requires the suppression of such "heresy" 
and "false religion" as violate the law of nature. And it is 
necessary that the terms " false religion" and " heresy" should 
be retained in the Confession, and not be surrendered by a pu- 
sillanimous spirit which succumbs to the infidel tenets of the 
age. A recent fact in our history, we mean the Kensington 
riots, proves the wisdom and sagacity of the framers of the Con- 
fession; and if the framers of the testimony intended to give up 
the terms "heresy," and " false religion," as indefensible, which 
we do not admit; if they really intended to "testify against the 
Confession/' the sooner that testimony is committed to the 
flames the better. Suppose the emissaries of Queen Victoria, 
or the French King, or of any other European monarch, had 
formed clubs among us, to advance any foreign power, merely 
political, and suppose the members of these clubs should secret- 
ly arm themselves, and shoot down unoffending citizens, assem- 
bled under the laws, to take lawful steps for repellingsuch foreign 
aggression, doesany sane man believe these foreigners would have 
escaped the just punishment of their impious rebellion and cold- 
blooded murder, with a fine of ONE DOLLAR? Would not 
the country have roused like one man from Maine to Georgia? 
Would not condign punishment have fallen upon the miscreants 
almost with the celerity of lightning? But this has been done 
with impunity, in the name and for the advantage of the Roman 
Pontiff, both a civil and religious despot, more dangerous to the 
rights of man than all the other monarchies of Europe! Why 
is this? It can be ascribed to two, and only two causes: — 1 # 
The superstitious awe which immediately seizes the minds of 
the ignorant multitude when any thing bearing the name of 
religion is involved. 2. The infidel sentiment that magistrates 
have no power to suppress such " heresy" or " false religion," 
as may be incompatible with public liberty. It is necessary, 
then, that these terms should be retained, that our liberties be 
not undermined, by such heresy and false religion, which it is 
supposed the magistrate may not suppress. 



92 DIVINE AND HITMAN RIGHTS. 

5. The eighteenth section fully asserts the doctrine of the 
Confession. It asserts that the magistrate ought to restrain 
those vices which are destructive to civil society and the good 
of the church, though conscience should be pleaded for them. 

6. The nineteenth section asserts the duty of obedience to 
the government of our country, in lawful commands, while we 
are bound to withhold all voluntary, active obedience to such 
as are unlawful, maintaining a faithful testimony against them. 

7. The twentieth section asserts the lawfulness of the Solemn 
League and Covenant of the three nations, and its engage- 
ments, so far as ecclesiastical, to be still binding on us, while 
it rejects the civil part of that covenant. 

8. The twenty-first section asserts, — 1. That we are as much 
bound to resist papists and other enemies of the Reformation 
as were those who swore the covenants. 2. That we owe the 
same duties to our country, that they did to theirs. 3. And to 
each other. 4. That we are bound to engage jointly as our 
ancestors did in a public solemn renewal of these covenants, 
which was actually done by us about fifteen years since. 

9. The twenty-second section asserts that our covenants 
should be renewed in a bond suited to the times. 

10. The twenty-third section declares the engagements of a 
church to be binding on all its members, without regard to 
change of residence, national, or other artificial distinctions of 
society, and that our covenanting is simply our solemn oath 
and engagement, voluntarily assumed, to do those things, and 
those only, which the law of God always made duties. 

Such being the solemn covenant engagements of the As- 
sociate Synod of North America, all her members are bound by 
a covenant higher than any man's covenant, which may not be 
annulled, to hold as void, condemn and testify against, a reso- 
lution of said Synod, passed on the 29th of May, 1844, in the 
following words: — 

"Resolved, that Synod express the following judgment on 
the plan of union presented to them by the late Convention of 
Reformed churches. As some of the churches represented 
insist on the alteration of the Westminster Confession, in the 
twentieth, twenty-third, and thirty-first chapters, relating to 
the power of the civil magistrate respecting matters of religion 
as indispensable to their concurrence in the proposed union; 
this Synod will not make an alteration of said Confession, in 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 93 

the above-mentioned particular, an insuperable obstacle to union, 
if other difficulties can be removed:" — 
For the following reasons: — 

1. This resolution contemplates all of our professed princi- 
ples, respecting the duty of magistrates, as things capable of 
being altered, laid aside, or abolished at any time, by the will 
of a majority of Synod. 

2. Synod actually agrees to lay these principles aside, upon 
a certain contingency, without proposing, or even naming, any 
substitute. 

3. It proceeds on the supposition, that the language in our 
Confession has no definite meaning, that the doctrine which 
it teaches may be different from the obvious import of its 
words, that it is only received by us for " substance of doc- 
trine," such as may be altered or modified at pleasure with- 
out the violation of our engagements ; such as filled the 
Synod of Ulster, in Ireland, with Arianism, the General As- 
sembly, in this country, with Arminian and Hopkinsian errors, 
and the Associate Reformed churches with latitudinarian prin- 
ciples and schemes, till she now demands an alteration of that 
Confession, as a sine qua non of ministerial and Christian com- 
munion with other churches of the reformation; and such as 
has induced a great portion of the Reformed Presbyterian 
church to abandon the attainments of reforming ancestors. 

4. This resolution is unconstitutional, and therefore null 
from the beginning. " For preventing innovations, sudden 
alterations, by passing of acts which may threaten the peace 
of the church, it is enacted that before any assembly make 
acts which are to be new standing rules and constitutions to 
the church, the same be first passed as overtures to be trans- 
mitted to the several presbyteries, and their consent reported 
to the next assembly, who may pass the same into acts, if the 
more general opinion of the church agree thereto." 

" The same authority and method that was necessary unto 
the framing of an ecclesiastic constitution, must be interposed 
and used at its repealing."* 

Those only, who acknowledge the sovereign will of a ma- 
jority in Synod, instead of our established constitution, to be 
the rule of administration, can recognise the validity of this act 

* Stuart's Collections, &c. Book Hi., Title 3, Sections 7, 8. 



94 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

5. This resolution is clearly seen to be an incipient step in 
apostacy, because it was passed in compliance with the demand 
of a party who have been carrying on a course of defection for 
a period of more than fifty years. In 1782, a party from the 
Reformed Presbyterian, and another from our own church, 
formed a union, and adopted a constitution, styling themselves 
the Associate Reformed church. Our own church condemned 
this new constitution, as "one of the most dubious professions 
of the faith we remember to have seen made by any church."* 
Yet with this judicial deed unrepealed, our Synod yield to the 
demand of these dubious professors, and render themselves 
equally dubious. And it may here be noticed as an historical 
fact, that in every instance where the language of the Confes- 
sion has been modified, it has introduced error : in every in- 
stance where a rigid adherence to the Confession has not been 
required, it has been followed with error. We refer to the 
Synod of Ulster, to the United Secession church of Scotland, 
to the General Assembly in the United States, and to the Asso- 
ciate Reformed church. Most of those who altered the Con- 
fession soon landed in the General Assembly. These facts 
are undeniable. 

6. This resolution is a severe condemnation of the fathers 
of the Associate synod in this country, for their faithful con- 
tendings for a covenanted Reformation. The parties which 
formed the Associate Reformed synod by a violation of their 
former engagements, were mutually condemned by both the 
mother churches, from which they had made defection, and by 
the faithful fathers of our own church; and yet, with a hardihood 
known and practised only by apostatizing spirits, they warned 
the Associate congregation of Oxford against our ministers for 
the crime of adhering to their solemn religious engagements.! 
Thus denying them to be lawful ministers of the gospel! Yet, 
our Synod are now willing to surrender their principles,at the 
nod of those, who have long since pronounced a judicial con- 
demnation against them! 

7. This resolution is not only inconsistent, but totally irre- 
concilable with the testimony of the Associate church,! and 
with her judicial condemnation of the United Secession in 
Scotland, reason third, || which is the refusal of that church to 
adopt the Westminster Confession. 

* Narrative to the Associate Testimony, Chap. x. 

t lb. Chap. 9. t Narrative, Chapters 9, 10. |j lb. Chap. 8, note. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN Kifi^fS. 95 

It may be said that Synod should not be charged with incon- 
sistency, because none of her present members were members 
at the time the defection of those who mutilated the Confession 
and constituted the Associate Reformed church was solemnly 
condemned. But it is a principle with us, and with all civilized 
nations, that the lawful deeds of our predecessors, both in church 
and state, are binding on us. Consequently, the inconsistency 
is glaring and undeniable. But we intend to bring this charge 
nearer home, and fasten it upon individuals now members of 
Synod. A regard to the truth, to the people of God now be- 
trayed, and misled by their rulers, and the hope of helping some 
out of the snare set for their feet, render it necessary that 
they should enjoy the benefit of undeniable historical facts. 

In 1826 and ? 27 the Synod condemned the Union which 
brought the United Secession Church of Scotland into existence, 
for the following, among other reasons: — 

The United Secession Church " declined adopting the West- 
minster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, as a part of the 
covenanted uniformity of the church of Christ, in the kingdoms 
of Britain and Ireland. Nor is the Confession received accord- 
ing to the act of the General Assembly receiving it in 1647, 
which had been the usual manner of receiving those standards 
in the Secession church."* 

In 1838, the Presbytery of Cambridge deposed the Rev. Dun^ 
can Stalker for the following items of offence, and their deed 
was sustained by the Synod. 

44 1. Denying the right constitution of Presbytery, and their authority as 
a Court of Christ. 

41 2. Slandering the Presbytery, and charging them positively with un- 
holy motives. 

44 3. Adopting a divisive course. 

44 4. Blessing God that he had been a minister in the United Secession 
church, which he could not do with any character or disposition of a Chris- 
tian, unless he considered his union with them lawful and just, and that 
United church as in the path of duty, was a declaration of disagreement 
with the Associate church in their maintenance of the reformation and 
secession principles. Now here we will not wait to argue respecting 
the evil of that union, or the propriety of the Associate church's testi- 
mony against it; we cannot wait with the latitudinarian at present: the 
fact of the Associate church's testimony against that union, of Mr. Stalk- 
er's admission into this church, and joining with us in our profession as 
a fellow-member and a fellow-labourer, is enough for us at present. The 
common sense of mankind may suffice to establish the points, that every 
voluntary association, as particular churches are, have a right to ma-in- 

* Narrative to our Testimony, p. 54. 



96 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

tain, and act on their own principles, and to require of every member 
a professed agreement with them and a conformity of practice, or to ex- 
clude them from their fellowship — and that every member be undissem- 
bling in his profession and practice. This was what was required of Mr. 
Stalker, and surely his expression respecting the United Secession re- 
quired retraction, confession, and some renewed evidence of unity of sen- 
timent and purpose with his brethren: for how could he bless God for 
having been a minister in the United Secession Church, if with his bre- 
thren he accounted that union a sinful defection! How could he bless 
God for joining in any sin 1 He must therefore have approved of that 
step, and could not testify sincerely and practically with his brethren 
against that union, nor their principles." 

*• The secondary cause of deposition was his course under Presbytery's 
dealing with him. It must be remembered that the primary offence is 
not always the principal — tnat the course of conduct respecting it may 
be the most heinous offence, and may imperiously require the highest 
censure." * 

On this item of ecclesiastical history the following observa- 
tions are offered: — 

(1.) After all exciting causes and all the petty and local inte- 
rests of that period have passed away, my judgment and con- 
science approve the action of Presbytery and Synod in this 
case, however much I may regret some other transactions more 
or less remotely connected with it, which originated with some 
of the agents partly from inexperience and incorrect informa- 
tion received from interested persons, and perhaps, in some 
cases, from worse causes. The rules of Presbyterian church 
government, the maintenance of justice, and the preservation 
of the church from confusion, every evil work, and in the end 
apostacy, rendered this procedure of our church courts abso- 
lutely necessary. 

(2.) Many of the individuals who now vote to mutilate our 
venerable Confession then voted for the condemnation of the 
United Secession church, because she had declined to maintain 
the Confession, and for the condemnation of Mr. Stalker, be- 
cause he justified that church! What are we to infer from this? 
Are these men ignorant of their principles? Who will believe 
this? Are differences in the church arising from personal con- 
siderations more important than doctrinal differences? Are 
doctrines to be measured by the interested will of a majority 
as well as personal offences? It is acknowledged that Mr. 
Stalker's justification of the Union in Scotland was the effect of 
alienation produced by other causes, that the whole of the pro- 

* Proceedings of the Associate Presbytery of Cambridge in relation to the 
Rev. D. Stalker, and Rev. A. Bullions, p. 66. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 97 

ceedings connected with that case originated in a "contention 
for personal standing."* 

Now it is evident the vote of synod, to alter conditionally 
the Confession, could have had no relation to personal standing 
in the church, though it is quite possible that that imaginary 
wizard, popular applause, or that baseless fabric of waking 
dreams, a great ecclesiastical body under one visible organiza- 
tion, may have flitted across the mental vision of some. Jt is 
possible that some forgot at the moment, that the spouse of Christ 
is not in any one public body; that the unity of the church is 
invisible, that her members are the children of light, and never 
unite with others for the suppression of the light, but for hold- 
ing it forth. We bring no charges against any man ; we im- 
peach no man's motives or integrity. But we do condemn 
public measures which we believe destructive to the well-being 
of the church. 

Is it so, that we can never procure the condemnation of 
error and immorality, nor the vindication of truth in any one 
case where personal standing in the church is not the main- 
spring of action? We do not believe that it is so. Such policy 
may suit the modern notions of some, regarding the duties of 
a gospel ministry, but it found no favour with reforming ances- 
tors. The ministry of those branches of the presbyterian church 
which have surrendered or begun to surrender the Westmin- 
ster Confession, have become an army of time-serving hirelings; 
and as far as regards any good they are doing, either towards 
the overthrow of infidelity or Romanism, or the emancipation 
of the world from the thraldom of Satan, they might better 
be found on the exchange, or in our workshops, or at the 
plough. Whenever we hear men plead compliance with sin 
in order to obtain a wider field of usefulness, we heartily wish 
they would go publicly to Rome, and no longer do their mas- 
ter's work in the bosom of God's church. We desire to see 
the lines drawn, and, with the help of God, so far as I am con- 
cerned, they shall be drawn. We have had enough of paltry 
personal interests, and contemptible ambition in the church of 
God, enough of sinful compliance for the sake of a piece of 
bread. We want men that can trust in the providence of God, 
and the magnanimity of his people, which never yet failed a 

* Reply to the Memorial of A. Whyte and others by Synod's committee, 
1842, p. 5. 
9 



98 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS, 

faithful minister; men who will throw themselves and their all^ 
for time and eternity, into the breach, do the work assigned 
them, and, when necessary, cast off the trammels of corrupt 
majorities, and refuse, at whatever hazard, to go with a multi- 
tude to do evil. The church has had enough of that policy 
which makes men offenders for a word, if they happen to be 
in the minority who are contending against the reigning sins 
of the day, which can see no sin in the bullying conduct, errors, 
and slanders of those who happen to go with the multitude, and 
which makes the will of the majority, instead of constitutional 
law, the rule of administration. Constitutional law is the 
shield both of majorities and minorities, and any departure 
from it is tyranny and apostacy. 

It is the policy here condemned that has, from the beginning, 
rested like an incubus upon the energies of the church, that 
leads so many in our day to homologate corrupt civil powers, 
and in some instances to become the patrons and guides of the 
state in its infidelity and oppression. But we are wandering. 

If it was right to condemn the Associate Reformed Synod? 
for mutilating the Confession; if it was right to condemn the 
United Secession church of Scotland for declining to adopt and 
maintain the Confession; if it was right to condemn Mr. Stalk- 
er for justifying the latter church; is it now right for those who 
pronounced these sentences of condemnation to engage them- 
selves in this very work of mutilation? It is useless to say 
that Mr. Stalker was condemned on other charges. The one 
here noticed, was made not the least prominent of four items 
of charge. 

8. This resolution is a breach of the most solemn covenant 
engagement that can be assumed by men. If there be any 
meaning in language, we, as a church, are bound to the 
whole doctrine of the Westminster Confession.* This re- 
solution is a breach of covenant, both with God and his peo- 
ple. It is vain to plead the example of the church of Scot- 
land, in laying aside her old formulas, that she might receive 
the Westminster Confession. For in that case the church sur- 
rendered nothing scriptural, but went forward in attainments. 
In this case there is giving up precious truth. And every per- 
son at all acquainted with the circumstances of the church of 
Scotland at the adoption of her present Confession, and our 

* See the bond of the covenant, and formula of questions put to ministers 
and elders. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 99 

present circumstances, must know the difference. She went 
forward, we are going backward. It is also vain to deny that 
it has been from the beginning the doctrine of the church of 
Scotland, that magistrates are bound to suppress public athe- 
ism, idolatry, blasphemy, and sabbath-breaking. This doctrine 
is also in the Confession; it is in the Larger Catechism; it is 
in the writings of all her approved ministers who have touched 
upon the subject. It is vain to deny that this has also ever 
been the doctrine of the Associate church; it is in the writings 
of all her faithful ministers who have defended the Confession; 
it is in the first Testimony; it is in the Testimony of Original Se- 
ceders; it is in our Testimony by its adoption of the Confession; 
it is in the catechisms of Fisher and Brown, standard writings, 
almost universally used among us. It-is equally vain to deny 
the obligation of our covenant, which requires us to use all 
lawful means, in every relation, not for the extirpation of pa- 
pists, but popery, and, what is more than all things else in the 
universe, this doctrine is in the word of God. This has been 
proved in the first part of this pamphlet. If we are not bound 
as a nation by our own voluntary act to obey God's law, it is 
time we as Christians should bind ourselves. Is it said the pro- 
posed basis of union recognises the duty of covenanting, and the 
descending obligation of covenants? It is replied, that this 
only makes the matter worse. First, abolish the peculiar, or 
distinctive doctrinal principles sworn to in the covenant, and 
then recognise its obligation! Kill a man, and declare him to 
be alive! This is like slavery in our civil constitution under 
the loudest pretence of liberty. 

9. The passing of this resolution was an act of tyranny. 
The constitution of the church gives the Synod no such power, 
and a usurpation of power is always tyranny. And those who 
rely upon a majority of Jive-sixths, or five to one in such cases, 
are prepared to adopt a human creed. If indeed the Synod 
can alter articles of faith at will, and the people are bound to 
believe, then we can only tell our annual creed after each an- 
nual meeting of Synod. We believe as the church believes, 
and because the church believes! But I prefer higher autho- 
rity for my faith and practice; so will every intelligent Chris- 
tian who has any knowledge of the manner in which votes am 
sometimes carried in church courts. 



100 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

10. This resolution is suicidal in its operation: it amounts to 
a public declaration to the world that we ministers of the As- 
sociate church have for one hundred years been requiring of 
the people a solemn adherence to the whole doctrine of a Con- 
fession, against which we have all this time been testifying! 
It is in vain that some say the proposed alterations will not 
surrender any doctrine! Let those who know nothing better 
believe this, as many will do! We know that the vast majo- 
rity of those who demand an alteration of the Confession are 
honest. They do not believe it, therefore they demand its 
alteration. We know that some in our own church do not 
believe it, therefore they vote for its alteration, while others 
yield through weariness of the almost hopeless contest. It is 
then folly to say the doctrine will be the same. Men do not 
ask for, nor will they consent to, any alteration of a religious 
creed which they believe. 

11. This resolution is an unjust contempt for the testimony 
of the Lord's witnesses who suffered in Britain for nearly one 
hundred years, many of them to banishment, some of them 
even unto death for the precious truth imbodied in our Con- 
fession, on the very points now called in question. 

12. Finally: this resolution is an ungrateful forgetfulness of 
the Lord's wonderful appearances for the deliverance of his 
church in ages past. " For he established a testimony in Ja- 
cob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our 
fathers that they should make them known unto their children; 
that the generation to come might know them, even the chil- 
dren which should be born, who should arise and declare them 
to their children, that they might set their hope in God, and 
not forget the works of God; but keep his commandments; and 
might not be as their fathers a stubborn and rebellious genera- 
tion, a generation that set not their heart aright, and whose 
spirit was not steadfast with God. The children of Ephraim, 
being armed, and carrying bows, turned back in the day of 
battle. They kept not the covenant of God, and refused to 
walk in his law; and forgat his works, and his wonders that 
he had showed them." 

III. Whether the constitution of the United States possess 
the moral qualities which the scriptures require in civil go- 
vernment? 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 10 1 

The general answer to this general question must be in the 
negative. But notwithstanding its moral delinquencies it ought 
to be obeyed in lawful commands. The difference between 
the valid being of government, and its moral character*, between 
subjection, and voluntary, active obedience, to unlawful com- 
mands; between individual resistance to magistrates and revo- 
lution; and also between obedience to lawful commands and 
swearing the oath of allegiance; have been clearly pointed out 
in the first part of this pamphlet. The simple question now 
before us, is this: Is the constitution of the United States such 
that Christians may take the oath of allegiance and be innocent? 
We are constrained to answer, No. In support of this answer 
three principles will be assumed as already proved, and as re- 
quiring no farther discussion: — I. That in taking the oath we 
swear to give an active support to every provision of the con- 
stitution. Turn to page 21 . 2. That we swear to support the 
constitution in the sense understood by the administrator of 
the oath, or we are guilty of mental reservation, which is per- 
jury. 3. That the constitution does not mean what any indi- 
vidual may suppose, but it means precisely what the Supreme 
Court, and the uniform action of the nation under it, say it 
means. Turn to page 45, and the quotation from Chilling- 
worth, p. 57 — 59. 

With these principles in view, let us proceed to a considera- 
tion of those provisions which are judged immoral. They 
relate to two points : the magistrate's power and duty in refe- 
rence to religion, and slavery. 

1. In reference to the magistrate's power, we have the fol- 
lowing provisions: — 

"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect 
union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, provide for the com- 
mon defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of 
liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this con- 
stitution for the United States of North America.— Preamble. 

"Art. VI. Clause 3. But no religious test shall ever be required as a 
qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." 

This is all we have in reference to religion, as the constitu- 
tion was first adopted in 1787; but in the amendments we find 
the following words : — 

"Art. 1. Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of 
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." 

Of these provisions we observe,—- 

9* 



102 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

(1.) There is no acknowledgment of the being of God, or of 
his law, or of his good providence in breaking the yoke of 
foreign domination. " We do ordain and establish," &c. We 
set up for ourselves, not only independent of earth, but of hea- 
ven also. It is said that this was a mere oversight; that the 
people of that period did regard the being, law, and providence 
of God. This is, at least, partly true. And if the Constitu- 
tion had contained nothing worse, this apology would now be 
generally acquiesced in as good. Yet the omission of all refe- 
rence to a Supreme Being was ominous of the evil that ensued, 
(2.) "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualifica- 
tion to any office or public trust under the United States." The 
term " religious," must, in the nature of things, be here taken 
in its most unlimited sense. There is no restraining or quali- 
fying word or clause. The term religion includes " a belief in 
the being and perfections of God, — in the revelation of his will 
to man, — in man's obligation to obey his commands, — in a 
state of rewards and punishments, — and in man's accountabi- 
lity to God." — Webster 9 s Dictionary. 

By this provision, pagans, Mahommedans, Deists, atheists, 
and any who may publicly deny man's accountability to God, 
are eligible to all the offices in the United States, and all the 
subordinate offices in the several states ; for no state may 
enact laws repugnant to the Constitution of the United States. 
If this be not atheism, what is? Had the Constitution made 
a denial of the being and providence of God, or the universal 
obligation of external obedience to his law resting upon all 
nations, a disqualification, and declared that the belief in any 
particular religious creed or mode of worship shall never be a 
test, it would have done much to secure the public liberty. 
As the matter now stands, the people have no security. 

(3.) "Congress shall make no law respecting the establish- 
ment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." 
Now if we recur to the definition of the term religion as 
already given, it will readily be perceived, that congress, conse- 
quently none of the states, can enact any law for the suppres- 
sion of public atheism, idolatry, blasphemy, or desecration of the 
Sabbath. Many of the wholesome laws of some of the states 
against these crimes, are clearly contrary to the spirit of this 
instrument, and are constitutional only because the Constitu- 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 103 

tion has prohibited the national government from taking any 
action whatever in relation to these crimes. Had the Consti- 
tution prohibited public practices of any kind against the ten 
commandments, and also the establishment of any distinctive 
religion or form of worship, as a national religion, there would 
have been some good ground for confidence in our institutions. 
But now we have none. The government of our country is 
as insecure as a house founded upon the sand. 

We suggest a query for the study of Christians, especially 
Presbyterians: — How can you, in the church, with the up- 
lifted hand to the Most High, solemnly swear that in every 
relation of life you will, "without respect of persons, endea- 
vour the extirpation of popery," and then in the state, with 
equal solemnity, swear that you will support a Constitution 
which gives to popery entire, perfect protection? This may 
be possible to some. Be this as it may, it has now become a 
historical fact, that popery so far sways the political destiny of 
this country, as to render the administration of public affairs 
almost wholly subservient to the rapid strides of her advancing 
power. Her minions decide our elections. Her priesthood 
have surveyed the field with an argus eye. They understand 
the protection given them by the Constitution, and the atheis- 
tical democracy of one half the population, which are ready for 
any religion or no religion, any government or no government? 
any morality or no morality, any security or no security for 
the rights of men, which will serve as a stepping-stone to 
political power. They perceive the growing depravity of all 
classes; the indifference, or defection and cowardice of a vast 
majority of protestants, and their almost unanimous acquies- 
cence in the unholy political toleration of popish imposture, 
blasphemy, superstition, and idolatry. The vote of our Sy- 
nod, in May last, respecting the Confession, was transmitted 
to Rome as a joyful surrender of the last testimony in the 
United States, in favour of persecuting protestantism, where 
also is recorded the name, and field of labour, and prospects, 
of every ordained minister belonging to all the bodies repre- 
sented in the convention of Reformed churches. 

2. In reference to slavery, we have the following provisions 
in the Constitution: — 

M Art. 1. Sect. 2. Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned 



104 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

among the several states, which may be included within thi3 Union, 
according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by add- 
ing to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service 
for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all 
other persons. 

"Art. 1, Sect. 8. Congress shall have power * * * to suppress insur- 
rections. 

"Art. 1. Sec. 9. The migration or importation of such persons as any 
of the states now existing may think proper to admit, shall not be pro- 
hibited by congress prior to the year 1808, but a tax or duty may be im- 
posed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. 

" Art. 4, Sect. 2. No person, held to service or labour in one state, under 
the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law 
or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labour, but shall 
be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labour 
may be due. 

"Art. 4, Sect. 4. The United States shall guaranty to every state in 
this Union a republican form of government; and shall protect each of 
them against invasion; and, on application of the legislature, or of the 
executive, (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic 
violence. 

These extracts comprise all that is said in the Constitution 
in reference to slavery. 

Article I., section 2, bases representation and taxation upon 
the enumeration of three-fifths of all persons who are neither 
free, nor Indians taxed; of course, three-fifths of all slaves 
are enumerated. These three-fifths are actually represented 
by twenty members on the floor of congress, and as many 
votes for president. Hence, though the name slave is not here, 
the thing is. 

Article I., section 9, secured the importation of slaves for a 
period of twenty-one years. 

Article I., section 8, gives congress power to suppress any 
insurrection; of course an insurrection of slaves struggling for 
liberty. This section also requires the active co-operation of 
all the states. 

Article IV., section 2, compels every state in the union to 
use its political power for the return of runaway slaves. This 
constitutes slavery a national institution. It is to be regretted 
that ministers of the gospel should help on the delusion of the 
people, by teaching them that the constitution does not enforce 
slavery. It does more ; it compels the free states to enforce 
it. No one who has read the Madison Papers can honestly 
deny this. We insert a few of many extracts that might be 
given : 



DIVINE AND HUMAN EIGHTS. 105 

« Tuesday, July 10, 1787. 

"Mr. King remarked that the four eastern states, having 800,000 souls, 
having one-third fewer representatives than the four southern states, 
having not more than 700,000 souls, rating the blacks as five for three. 
The eastern people will advert to these circumstances, and be dissatisfied. 
He believed them to be very desirous of uniting with their southern 
brethren, but did not think it prudent to rely so far on that disposition, as 
to subject them to any gross inequality. He was fully convinced that 
the question concerning a difference of interests did not lie where it had 
hitherto been discussed between the great and small states; but between 
the southern and eastern, p. 1057. 

"Wednesday, July 11, 1787. 

"Mr. Butler and General Pinckney insisted that blacks be included in 
the rule of representation equally with the whites; and for that purpose 
moved that the words ' three-fifths' be struck out. 

"Mr. Gerry thought that three-fifths of them, was, to say the least, 
the full proportion that could be admitted. 

"Saturday, July 1-1, 1787. 

"Mr. Madison (of Virginia.) It seemed now pretty well understood, 
that the real difference of interests lay, not between the large and small, 
but between the northern and southern states. The institution of slavery, 
and its consequences, formed the line of discrimination, p. 1104. 

" Monday, July 23, 1787. 

"General Pinckney reminded the convention, that if the committee 
should fail to insert some security to the southern states against an eman- 
cipation of slaves, and taxes on exports, he should be bound by duty to 
his state to vote against their report, p. 1187. 

"Thursday, September 13, 1787. 

"Article 1, Section 2. On motion of Mr. Randolph, the word "servi- 
tude" was struck out, and " service" unanimously inserted, the former 
being thought to express the condition of slaves, and the latter the obliga- 
tions of free persons. 

" Mr. Dickinson and Mr. Wilson moved to strike out, ' and direct 
taxes,' from Article 1, Section 2, as improperly placed in a clause relating 
merely to the constitution of the house of Representatives. 

" Mr. Gouverneur Morris. The insertion here was in consequence of 
what had passed on this point; in order to exclude the appearance of 
counting the negroes in the representation. The including of them may 
now be referred to the object of direct taxes, and incidentally only to that 
of representation. 

"Saturday, September 15, 1787. 

"Article 4, Section 2, (the third paragraph,) the term "legally" was 
struck out; and the words, "under the laws thereof," inserted after the 
word "state," in compliance with the wish of some who thought the 
term legal equivocal, and favouring the idea that slavery was legal in a 
moral view, p. 1589. 

"Mr. Gerry stated the objections which determined him to withhold his 
name from the constitution: 1-2-3-4-5-6, that three-fifths of the blacks 
are to be represented, as if they were freemen, p. 1595. 

Mr. Madison, in the Virginia convention which adopted the 
Constitution, uses these words: — 

" Another clause secures us that property which we now possess. At 
present, if any slave elopes to any of those states where slaves are free, 
he becomes emancipated by their laws. For the laws of the states are 
uncharitable to one another in this respect. But in this constitution, " no 



106 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

person held to service, or labour, in one state, under the laws thereof, 
escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation 
therein, be discharged from such service or labour; but shall be delivered 
upon claim of the party to whom such service or labour may be due." 
This clause was expressly inserted to enable owners of slaves to reclaim 
them. This is a better security than any that now exists. No power is 
given to the general government to interpose with respect to the property 
in slaves now held by the states. The taxation of this state being equal 
only to its representation, such a tax cannot be laid as he supposes. They 
cannot prevent the importation of slaves for twenty years; but after that 
period, they can. 

Governor Randolph said, — . 

"I believe, whatever we may think here, that there was not a member 
of the Virginia delegation who had the smallest suspicion of the abolition 
of slavery. Go to their meaning. Point out the clause where this formi- 
dable power of emancipation is inserted. But another clause of the con- 
stitution proves the absurdity of the supposition. The words of the 
clause are, " No person held to service or labour in one state, under the 
laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or 
regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labour; but shall 
be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labour may 
be due." Every one knows that slaves are held to service and labour. 
And when authority is given to owners of slaves to vindicate their pro- 
perty, can it be supposed they can be deprived of it. If a citizen of this 
state in consequence of this clause, can take his runaway slave in Mary- 
land, can it be seriously thought, that after taking him and bringing him 
home, he could be made free'? — Convention of South Carolina. 

"Mr. Iredell. Now, sir, observe that the eastern states, who long ago 
have abolished slavery, did not approve of the expression slaves; they 
therefore used another that answered the same purpose. 

"In some of the northern states, they have emancipated all their slaves. 
If any of our slaves, said he, go there and remain there a certain time, 
they would, by the present laws, be entitled to their freedom, so that their 
masters could not get them again. This would be extremely prejudicial 
to the inhabitants of the southern states, and to prevent it, this clause is 
inserted in the constitution. Though the word slave be not mentioned, 
this is the meaning of it. The northern delegates, owing to their par- 
ticular scruples on the subject of slavery, did not choose the word slave 
to be mentioned. 

" We have obtained a right to recover our slaves, in whatever part of 
America they may take refuge, which is a right we had not before. 

"We have slavery, already, amongst us. The constitution found it 
among us; it recognised it and gave it solemn guarantees. To the full 
extent of these guarantees we are all bound, in honour, in justice, and by 
the constitution. All the stipulations contained in the constitution, in 
favour of the slave-holding states which are already in the union, ought 
to be fulfilled, and so far as depends on me, shall be fulfilled, in the 
fulness of their spirit, and to the exactness of their letter." — Webster. 

But it is unnecessary to continue these extracts. That 
slavery is a national sin no reasonable man can doubt who is 
not already resolved to withstand the force of truth for some 
unworthy purpose. 

Article IV,, section 4 ? h\nd$ the national government to 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 107 

suppress "domestic violence in any of the states," and, of 
course, to put down any slave insurrection that may occur. 
Slavery, then, is a national sin. The non-slaveholding states 
are as really involved as the slave states. Their guilt is greater. 
They are mere panders to other men's lusts: of the two, they 
occupy the more contemptible position. We omit any refe- 
rence to the horrid cruelties of slavery. They only harrow 
the feelings to no purpose. 

We may here insert another query for Christians:— -Can you, 
as Christians, receive the affecting memorials of our Lord's 
death under the solemnity of an oalh, to " break every yoke," 
— to "do to others as you would be done by,"— to "love 
your neighbour as yourselves," and then, as citizens, swear 
in the name of the Most High God, that you will support a 
Constitution, or form of civil government, which consigns 
the soul of your neighbour to perpetual ignorance of God, and 
the only Saviour of sinners, and his body to remediless bon- 
dage? Or, in other words, can you swear, in the name of 
the Most High, both to obey and disobey His law, and be 
innocent? Some will ask why all this sympathy for slaves, 
who are really in a better condition than many northern free- 
men? The overflowings of our sympathy go out towards the 
deplorable condition of those professing Christians who are 
involved, as we believe, many of them ignorantly, in the guilt 
of both perjury and unlawful swearing, and are living under 
its hardening influence. But if any should fail to be convinced, 
let them not persecute, nor deprive those who are convinced, of 
their Christian liberty. 

It is time, however, to draw this pamphlet to a close. It 
was intended, at first, simply to publish a discourse which 
occupied one hour in the delivery; but the questions discussed 
seemed so important, and the materials so abundant, that we 
have nearly perpetrated the crime of making a book, a thing 
not at first intended. 

It is proper to notice a few of the more prevalent objections 
to our views, which have not been particularly answered. It 
is objected, — 

1. That civil government is designed for the regulation of 
men's rights to such natural things as refer exclusively to their 
temporal interests, and therefore it is absurd to connect any 
religious test with civil government. Why should religious 



108 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

tests be applied to a philosophical society, a literary or a medi- 
cal college, a rail-road company, or a banking corporation? 
We answer, — 1. Because man is, and must of necessity be, as 
much a religious as he is a social being; and his religious and 
social rights are as indissoluble as cause and effect. There is not 
now, nor has there ever been a community on earth, however 
ignorant, barbarous, degraded, or brutish, without a religion. 
2. Because the religion of men may be repugnant to the being 
of God, the natural law of the universe, and the temporal and 
eternal welfare of mankind. Men worship not only insects 
and reptiles, but demons and devils, and think they do God 
service by cutting the throats of all who question the sacred- 
ness of their idolatrous worship. 3. God requires magistrates 
who have the revealed law of nature, to obey it, and enforce 
an external obedience to it, upon the pain of temporal ruin to 
their country, and eternal ruin to themselves. 4. Therefore a 
religious test is necessary. 5. Who gave to men the right to 
agree to an immoral law, as a condition of association in the 
capacity of a rail-road company, any more than in an associa- 
tion for civil government? Besides, magistracy is the ordi- 
nance of God, appointed to enforce his law upon its subjects, 
for the regulation of all their external public conduct. But 
neither a rail-road company, private corporation, nor any other 
voluntary association of men, have any such commission. 
In both cases, obedience is due to the law, while magistracy 
must enforce it; other associations may not, their power being 
denned by their charter, or articles of association, and limited 
to their own members. No distinctive religious creed is, or 
can, lawfully, be a test, but conformity to the law of eternal 
righteousness, which is also the law of true religion, must be a 
test, or men must reap the fruit of rebellion against the Most 
High God. 

2. Declining to vote leaves the government altogether in 
the hands of bad men ; and if one of the nominees should pos- 
sess a better moral character than all the others, I am bound to 
vote for him. We reply, — 1. That so long as a constitution 
which controls the administration of a government is immoral, 
that administration must be immoral; so, by voting, you do 
not remove the immorality, but become a partaker of other 
men's sins. 2. You do not, cannot, in such circumstances, 
vote to amend that which is wrong, for (1.) You acknowledge 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 109 

the wrong in the very act of voting. (2.) You engage to per- 
mit the continuance of the wrong, if the majority still persist, 
and thus you make that majority the supreme rule of duty. 
(3.) You enter into a confederacy of robbers, knowing them 
to be such. (4.) You acknowledge that men may swear de- 
ceitfully. (5.) That the end justifies the means. Suppose you 
elect your good man, the first step of his official career is to 
swear an unlawful oath. The truth is, the right to make or 
amend laws is limited by the divine law. It is no presumption, 
with God's word before us, to challenge the universe of crea- 
tures against this proposition. No human law which infringes 
upon divine law, ever had, or ever can have, validity. There- 
fore the motto of a new party among us, — "NO UNION 
WITH SLAVEHOLDERS,"— is right. An incident oc- 
curred in the Associate Synod in 1841, having a direct bear- 
ing on the point before us, which ought to be seriously pon- 
dered by all her people. A member of the church in western 
Pennsylvania, being a constable, received from a justice, and 
served, a warrant for the arrest of a runaway slave. For this 
act the session suspended him ; he appealed, and the presby- 
tery reversed the decision of session. The moderator of ses- 
sion appealed to Synod, and his appeal was almost unanimous- 
ly sustained. By this decision no officer of government can 
obey his oath of allegiance to the Constitution, and enjoy the 
privileges of the Associate Church, and yet the church allows 
her members to take the oath of allegiance ! Here we have a 
query, — Did this constable sin by obeying his oath of office? 
The synod have said that he did! If so, we assert that the 
greater sin was his oath, unless it should be assumed that 
synod intended to condemn the keeping of lawful oaths! Who 
will say this? I voted with the majority, because I believe 
any voluntary obligation to an immoral law to be sin, and the 
keeping of any such obligation to be adding sin to sin. Those 
who voted to condemn this constable, and still exercise the 
elective franchise, are guilty of helping other men to do the 
very thing which this constable had done, and for which 
synod suspended him! "Thinkest thou, man, that judgest 
them that do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt 
escape the judgment of God?" We hope such inconsistency 
may alarm the consciences of some, and lead them to renounce 
10 



110 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

their abolition principles or the Constitution. "No man can 
serve two masters." No man can serve Christ and Belial. 

3. It will naturally be objected, that we condemn all Chris- 
tians who take the oath of allegiance to the constitution of the 
United States, &c, and that we require the church to make a 
refusal of the oath a term of communion. We condemn the 
taking of the oath, but not all the individuals who have taken 
it. We think the church is bound to make a refusal of the oath 
a term of communion; but, so long as she may refuse to take 
this step, persons who think with me must tolerate their bre- 
thren, who think differently, or secede. But this secession must 
not take place till all lawful means have been used to effect a 
reformation; nor even then, unless we are fully persuaded that 
it would be rebellion against the Lord Jesus Christ to continue 
in a communion where the oath is permitted. But is the con- 
demnation of this oath consistent with the forbearance of those 
who take it? In present circumstances, we think this distinc- 
tion is clearly necessary, at least in the case of many persons; 
for the following reasons: — 

(1.) The deception practised upon the people by the framers 
of the Constitution has been so successfully managed, that the 
people of the non-slaveholding states had very little cause to 
suspect the gross immorality of the Constitution. A stranger 
ignorant of the existence of slavery in the United States might 
read the Constitution without suspecting its existence. For 
while the terms " slave," " slavery," " slaveholder" are craftily 
suppressed, these things are in it in all their odious deformity, 
and in full force. 

(2.) There was really considerable doubt, how far the non- 
,ilaveholding states might be implicated in the evil, till the de- 
cision of the supreme court, I think in 1841, placed that ques- 
tion beyond controversy. The yoke is now known to rest 
alike and with the most perfect equality on all the states. 
Slavery in the United States is now known to be a national 
institution. 

(3.) The church through her ministers must first teach the 
people the law before she can ask them to obey it. It is pre- 
posterous to attempt the enforcement of an unknown law. 

4. In regard to our Confession, it is objected, — 1. That we 
are bound to the doctrines, and not the words of the Confession. 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. Ill 

How do we know what the Confession or any other book 
teaches, if not from its words? Even when the spirit, or ten- 
dency of a book may be somewhat different, or more or less 
extensive than the literal import of its words, we are com- 
pelled to learn these things from its words, or not at all. This 
objection is a mere trick to mislead the unwary. 2. The lan- 
guage of the Confession needs explanation, but we desire our 
public principles should be expressed in language that needs 
no explanation. Then you desire what never was nor ever 
will be. No truth of divine revelation can be expressed in 
language which cannot be perverted by designing and wicked 
men. Even the perfect word of God is not exempt from such 
perversions. Hence the necessity of a Confession to rescue 
the scriptures from the false glosses and perversions of enemies. 
And if the scriptures are not exempt from abuse, how can the 
Confession be? It is enough that the servant be as his master. 
Hence the necessity of the explanation which the Testimony 
gives of the Confession, to rescue it from perversion. Hence 
also the necessity of occasional testimonies against the abuse 
of both the Confession and the standing testimony. Hence 
also the necessity of every sermon that is preached. 3. We 
have testified against the Confession. This we have already 
seen is a slander against the Secession church. Not the least 
indication of such a thing ever appeared in our church till the 
meeting of Synod, May, 1544. But it must be confessed that 
the vote then passed looks like a disguised, half-way, insidious 
testimony against the Confession, sent out as a feeler of the 
public pulse, in order to ascertain whether ministers might 
venture to testify against the Confession without the fear of 
losing their congregations. It must also be confessed, that all 
who yield to that vote will testify against the Confession; and 
all who are willing to pin their faith upon the sleeves of their 
ministers, will no doubt submit to that vote, or any other, that 
Synod may choose to pass. To this there should be no con- 
sent 4. You attach undue importance to the Confession; it 
is a human work, and therefore imperfect: and if imperfect, it 
should be altered from time to time, to suit circumstances, or 
for the more explicit statement or defence of the truth. A& 
this is the only valid argument that can be legitimately urged, 
for an alteration of the Confession, it demands particular at- 
tention. Let the following things be observed :— (1.) The 



112 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

supreme law of the church is the written word of God. It is 
only the combined influence of the word and Spirit that guide 
men to eternal life. As men have obeyed or disobeyed the 
word, so must they receive their sentence in the final judg- 
ment. (2.) The Confession is a standard of visible communion 
or privilege in any organized ecclesiastical body which may 
adhere to it. It is the test, not of union to Christ, but of 
union to a particular branch of the visible church. (3.) The 
Confession is also a public testimony to the doctrines of divine 
revelation as understood and witnessed for in the body adopt- 
ing it, against all opposing errors. It diners from the scrip- 
tures in this essential particular: the scriptures are Christ's 
testimony to us; the Confession is our testimony to His truth. 
(4.) The Confession ought to embrace, and our Confession 
does embrace those truths, and those only, which are known, 
and of universal application. Therefore, no change of circum- 
stances can require its alteration. (5.) If we expunge any 
truth which it contains, we are found both covenant-breakers 
and false witnesses for Christ; and this is the very thing now 
proposed to be done. It was the design of the framers of the 
Confession, and is still the design of its friends and adherents, 
that it should be a permanent bulwark of the reformation, and 
that the church should issue a testimony from time to time, as 
there might be a call in Providence, vindicating its doctrines 
against opposing errors. Therefore if it is to be slain and 
buried, the writer can be no party to its death or funeral 
obsequies. It shall never be recorded, either in heaven or on 
earth, that this Confession perished by the assistance of his 
hand. He fears that, such an act might exclude him from the 
company of that exalted cloud of witnesses around the throne 
in glory, who, while on earth, sealed the very doctrine, now 
sought to be blotted out, with their blood. He does not say 
that such an act would exclude others: with others he has no 
concern in an affair of this kind. 

5. As Psalm ii. 72, Isaiah xlix. 23, and other similar pas- 
sages, have been pressed into the service of those who plead 
for the establishment, by the state, of some distinctive creed or 
mode of worship, to the exclusion of all others; so, in replying 
to their arguments, their opponents have run into the opposite 
extreme, and affixed a meaning to these scriptures which they 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 113 

will by no means bear. We have taken the middle ground 
between these contending parties, because we believe them 
both to be wrong. Those who would strip magistrates of all 
power concerning religion run into atheism, while those who 
contend for an exclusive state creed take away the rights of 
conscience. 

In regard to Psalm ii., it is admitted, — by one of no mean 
reputation, who having diverged from one of the above named 
extremes to the other, is now said, but we hope untruly, to be 
in favour of altering the Confession, because it is erroneously 
supposed to teach the doctrine of establishments, — that the 
second psalm contains li a glowing description of the folly of 
resisting Heaven's decree, and the necessary obligation of 'the 
powers that be,' cheerfully to acquiesce in the wise arrange- 
ments of him who is King of kings and Lord of lords. There- 
fore, he exhorts the great dignitaries of the earth, to embrace 
his truth, and submit to his jurisdiction. 'Kiss the Son,' &c." 

In regard to the seventy-second psalm, it is also admitted, 
that, "The universal subjection of all the potentates on earth, 
from the highest to the lowest, to Jesus the Messiah, as King 
of kings, is in this psalm, categorically predicted." Respect- 
ing these concessions from one of the most distinguished of 
our opponents, it is observed, — 1. That they at least, recognise 
our Lord's mediatorial dominion over the nations. 2. That 
our Lord administers to the nations the law by which they are 
bound, which we have already seen is the ten commandments. 
3. The only way of escape from these conclusions, is, by 
assuming that magistrates are here spoken of in their private, 
not their official relation. But such an assumption cannot 
stand; because, 1. The scriptures do not call private persons 
kings of the earth. 2. Whatever Jaw of social intercourse a 
man is bound to obey publicly in his private capacity, he is 
equally bound to enforce in his official station. 

In reference to Isaiah xlix. 23, the same writer thus expresses 
himself: — 

"But there is another rendering of this passage, viz: "Kings shall be 
thy foster-sons, and their queens thy foster-daughters." And, if this is 
an admissible version, it would appear, that instead of being nursing 
fathers to the church, they would be nursling children in the church! 
And it must be confessed that this rendering gives a meaning very con- 
sistent with what follows: "They shall bow down to thee with their 
laces toward the ground." It is not a common thing for nurses to bow 

1Q* 



114 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

down with their faces to the ground, i. e., most humbly to acknowledge 
their inferiority to their nurslings. We can conceive nothing so well 
calculated to meet the literal fulfilment of this prophecy, on the principle 
of its usual exposition, as the spectacle of kings and emperors kissing 
the great toe of the Roman pontiff." 

This specimen of reasoning deserves some notice. Suppose 
the translation here given should be more accurate than that of 
our common version, which, however, is not admitted, we may 
inquire, — 1. Did it never occur to the learned author, that 
magistrates, as individuals, may submit to the church, and even 
acknowledge their inferiority to the gospel ministry in relation 
to her internal interests, while, as magistrates, they claim and 
exercise dominion over the church in regard to her external 
and temporal interests, enforcing upon all her members an ex- 
ternal conformity to the law of nature? — 2. What kind of a 
blessing to the church was "the spectacle of kings kissing the 
toe of the Roman pontiff?" Surely that must be a bad cause 
which requires for its support the perversion of "the exceed- 
ing great and precious promises" of the gospel to predictions 
of Antichrist's reign! 

The same author assumes that "the queen's authority cannot 
be official in the life-time of her husband," therefore "the nursing 
cannot be public, official, or executive." Indeed! Is not the 
authority of the present reigning queen of England, who has 
a husband, official? Or, suppose the queen, like Elizabeth, 
should have no husband, will not her authority be official? 

We are not aware of any other objections worthy of notice, 
which we have not attempted to answer in the progress of the 
discussion; with what success, is not for us to judge. But this 
we know, that the "dominion of Christ shall extend from sea to 
sea;" that "all kings shall fall down before him;" and of course 
execute his law; that "all nations shall serve him," that he 
" shall deliver the poor, and the needy, and redeem their soul 
from deceit and violence." 

CONCLUSION. 

It may be readily inferred from the preceding pages, that 
we regard the following positions as established: — 

1. That forms of government and magistrates, become such, 
in two ways; either by the preceptive will, or providential per- 
mission of God. That it is only to the former kind that we 
can swear the oath of allegiance, or yield a voluntary, active 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 115 

support: while to the latter we must as individuals and Chris- 
tians be in subjection, for peace's sake, and yield obedience to 
their lawful commands, for conscience's sake, testifying against 
such as are unlawful. 

2. That the ten commandments are the supreme law of civil 
government, both tables being equally binding upon nations, 
as such. 

3. That there can be no controversy respecting the meaning 
of the ten commandments as applicable to the external conduct 
of men. On this point the world is agreed, the law having 
its foundation in the nature of man; on this point, therefore, 
magistrates are safe judges. The controversy here, respects 
not the meaning of the law, but the refusal of men to yield 
obedience to its requirements. 

4. That there is room for controversy respecting faith and 
worship; because the covenant of grace is supernatural to man; 
and the meaning of its provisions can only be rightly under- 
stood and obe} T ed by a work of the same Holy Spirit who has 
revealed it. Here the magistrate is totally and for ever excluded. 
This is holy ground. 

5. That, for the reasons advanced in the third and fourth pro- 
positions, the covenant of grace, though supernatural, in regard 
to its origin, operation, and final end, yet, all its provisions, or 
arrangements, being in conformity to the natural law, the en- 
forcement of that law upon the outward conduct of men, by 
the magistrate, can never violate any libert}' of conscience 
which God has given. For God, who is Lord of the con- 
science, has required its subjection to this law, in every rela- 
tion. (See the extract from Buchanan, pp. 71 — 73.) 

6. For the same reasons advanced in the third and fourth 
propositions, by an external enforcement of the moral law, 
the magistrate must necessarily become a nursing-father to the 
church; and by refusing to enforce that law he must as neces- 
sarily, become a tyrant, an oppressor, and eventually a perse- 
cutor of the church. 

7. That the church can never evangelize the world till ma- 
gistrates enforce the law of nature, for the following reasons:— 
1. Magistrates are Christ's ministers, not for the propagation 
of religion, but for the punishment of public immoralities, and 
for "restraining and conquering" the outward enemies of the 



116 BIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

church; both of which things they do, by simply enforcing the 
law that they administer upon all their subjects. Those who 
deny this reason should begin anew the study of the Old Tes- 
tament scriptures. 2. The moral character of the great mass 
of the people will, and must, resemble that of the civil govern- 
ment. No moral influence can effectually resist the combined 
moral and physical powers of the government over the minds 
of the great body of the people. And though it is not by 
might, nor by power, but by His Spirit, that Christ builds up 
his church, yet His Spirit turns the hearts of nations whither- 
soever he will, using wicked rulers as instruments for the exe- 
cution of his purposes; and raising up just rulers who shall 
govern by administering his law. Thus the joint instrumen- 
tality of the ministry and magistracy was, at the reformation, 
and will be again employed in subduing the nations to King 
Messiah's reign. 

8. The doctrine of the seventh proposition does not contra- 
dict, but confirms the truth, that Christ has supplied his church 
with all the means neeessary for the conquest of the world. 
It only asserts, that she refuses, at present, to employ all those 
means. 

9. The doctrine of the seventh proposition is not popery. 

It has the following strongly marked points of difference : 

1. It assumes revelation to be the supreme law. 2. That the 
magistrate is the judge of the law in its application to externals. 
3. It denies the power of magistrates to punish ecclesiastical 
offences; or to propagate true religion by the sword. Other 
differences might be noticed, but these are sufficient to show 
that I am not a papist, as has been slanderously asserted. 

10. That popery will never fall till extirpated by the power 
of the civil magistrate. The sword of the eivil magistrate 
gave it being, continuance, and the power of doing mischief; 
by the same sword must it perish: "The ten horns which thou 
sawest upon the beast, these styall hate the whore, and shall 
make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn 
her with fire. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his 
will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until 
the words of God shall be fulfilled." Rev. xvii. 16, 17. 

11. That liberty of conscience consists, of freedom from 
human authority, in reference to our religious belief, and mode 
of worship; but the law sets bounds to this liberty, requiring 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 117 

that the public creed and outward form of our religion be in con- 
formity to the ten commandments. 

12. That the prevalent notion of liberty of conscience, means 
liberty to sin; that conscience has no lord; that liberty of con- 
science may not be pleaded in favour of true religion, but may 
be exercised in support of infidelity, popery, oppression, and 
every species of transgression against the first table of the di- 
vine law. 

13. That the Constitution of the United States is essentially 
immoral in respect to the power and duty of the magistrate in 
reference to religion, and in its pro-slavery provisions. 

14. That the enforcement of slavery in the state, and its to- 
leration in the church, are crimes, such as provoke the Most 
High to destroy nations. 

15. That the oath of allegiance to the constitution, — holding 
office, — the exercise of the elective franchise under it, is each 
alike sinful; and amounts to the renunciation of God's autho- 
rity under the solemnity of an oath. 

16. That every argument urged in favour of the oath of al- 
legiance, proceeds, — 1. On the assumption that men are per- 
mitted to engage in the work of moral evil, in order to remove 
moral evil; — Or 2. On the assumption that an oath or covenant, 
unlawful in the matter of it, is binding, and ought to be ob- 
served. Consequently, that Herod did right in killing John. 

17. That so long as the present constitution of the United 
States continues to be supported, the following effects must 
continue to increase, namely: — 1. Infidelity. 2. Public crimes 
of every description. 3. Slavery. 4. Popery, notwithstand- 
ing the efforts of the church, Native American, or any other 
party. We do not condemn this party, nor any other: Our 
meaning is, that this party can never obtain its object under the 
Constitution, as it now stands. Nor can any party accomplish 
any permanent good which recognises the Constitution, and 
declines to make a distinction between the professors of the 
Christian religion and idolaters. 

18. That the Westminster Confession of Faith harmonizes 
with the scriptures in regard to the magistrate's power and 
duty in reference to religion. 

19. That any departure from it by Presbyterians is apos- 
tacy. * **■ 



1 18 DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 

20. That the Associate Synod have formally and explicitly 
covenanted to abide by the whole doctrine of this Confession. 

21. That the vote of last meeting is invalid, and ought to 
exert no influence over her members. 

22. That the act of the Associate Synod excluding slave- 
holders from her communion is utterly repugnant with the per- 
mission of her members to take the oath of allegiance to the 
constitution. A regard to consistency, to say nothing of mora- 
lity, or integrity, requires her to repeal that act, or condemn 
the oath of allegiance to the constitution. 

23. That a vast majority of Protestant ministers with pro- 
fessions of abhorrence of church and state, are fawning syco- 
phants of the state, exalting the immoral "powers that be," 
even beyond their Erastian brethren in Great Britain. At the 
late numerous convention, which assembled in Baltimore, to 
promote the better observance of the Christian Sabbath, a reso- 
lution, expressed in mild and dignified terms, condemning the 
transaction of public business on that holy day, by the nation- 
al legislature, was virtually rejected! In the same cringing 
disposition to civil power, slavery is tolerated in the visible 
church of God! 

24. The present efforts of associations, ecclesiastical and 
others, to disseminate true religion, preserve liberty, &c, must 
all prove abortive, for two reasons: 1. They have surrendered 
one of the institutions of Christ's appointment for the accom- 
plishment of these purposes, the magistratical enforcement of 
law. 2. They are involved in a sinful compliance with the 
immoralities of the "powers that be." There is an Achan in 
the camp, and the armies of Israel flee before their enemies. 

25. The church of Christ, in this land, is rapidly going into 
captivity to her enemies. The Babylonians are already on 
the march. The few who, like Jeremiah, see the approaching 
evil, are as little heeded as was that prophet. 

Finally, it may be said for the encouragement of "those men 
who are sighing and crying" for these abominations, that the 
time of their duration is fixed in the decree of the Most High 
God. In the mean time, let such remember, 1. That the church 
is safe, though but few, comparatively, of this generation should 
be saved. The Lord God omnipotent reigns, let his people 
rejoice. He has already made a Pharaoh, a Nebuchadnezzar, 



DIVINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS. 119 

a Cyrus, and a Henry, instruments for the deliverance of his 
church. He can still use the present Antichristian powers of 
the earth for the same purpose. 2. That God is in the midst 
of Zion; nothing can so far remove her as to inflict any real or 
permanent injury upon such as have their robes made white in 
the blood of the Lamb. 3. That in a little time the kingdoms 
of the world must acknowledge the dominion of our Lord; 
then shall magistrates obey and enforce his law; then shall 
kings be nursing-fathers; superstition, and idolatry, and oppres- 
sion shall be banished from the abodes of men; the shout of 
victory shall ascend from all lands, in loud hosannas to the 
King of kings and Lord of lords; " Glory to God in the high- 
est, peace on earth, good-will to men." For, " I beheld till 
the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, 
whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head 
like fine wool; his throne was like the fiery flame, and his 
wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth 
from before him; thousands thousands ministered unto him, 
and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him; the 
judgment was set, and the books were opened. And, behold, 
one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and 
came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought him near be- 
fore him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and 
a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve 
him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not 
pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. 
And the kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the king- 
dom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of 
the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting 
kingdom, and all rulers shall serve and obey him." 



INDEX. 



\ 



X 



Page 
Associate Synod, its action condemned 

for twelve reasons, 93 — 100 

Associate Testimony, 87 

Analysis, 90 

Atheistical principles, c0 

Brown's views 66—69 

Civil Government a Divine institution, 

A moral science, 5 

Subject to the law of natuie, 15,26 

Subject to bo h cables, 29 

And why, 59 

Not Jewish, 34 

Should punish homicide with dea h, . . 37 

Subjection to, 6, la 

Obedience, 7 

Must be lawful 24, 69 

Should recogni.se God 9 

Difference between obedience anil sub- 
jection 6, 7, 18. 22 

Ordinance of man, 25 

How it is so, 25 

Resistance, 22, 25 

Revolution 24 

Constitution of the United S ates, 

Condemned by God's word, 17, 101 

Voting, 18 

Office 18 

Refusal not treason, 43 

Crimes to bu suppressed 27 

Proof, 27 

Difference between Great Britain and the 

UnitedSttes 64 

Divine and Human Rights 

Inseparable, 4 

Law of nature defined, 6 

Dominion of Christ, 

Essential and Mediatorial, 11 

Mediatorial two-fold 11 

One branch to be surrendered, 12 

Over nations 10, 14 

Nations must recognise, 13 

Examples 

OfJoseph, 10 

Saul,.... W 

~ Kings of Judah and Israel 20 

OfDaniel, 10 



Page 

Exposition of Romans xiii. &c, 6,71, 72 

God moral Governor, 9 

Source <i power, 29 

Henry VIII., 28 

Highchuich'sm, 65 

Infidelity the same, 77 

Juries, 19 

Liberty of conscience 32 

Mag strates hold office in two ways, ... 

By natural law and permission, 16 

Magistrate's power limi.ed, 

Cannot enforce creeds, 28,30,31,36 

No judge in religion, 44 

Is a judge of nature's law, 55 

Is a judge in externals. 44 

His jurisdiction defined, . . . - 45—48 

A co-worker with the church, 31 

Shou Id sn ppress popery, 63 

And why 63 

New-England 51 

Oath of allegiance 

Why condemned, 21 

Its inconsistency 48 

Denies the magistrate's just power, .. 101 

Sustains .-la very 104 

Objections answered, 107 

Paying taxes 23 

Private judgment 52—54 

Refusal of government to obey the law 

of nature 

Docs not destroy its being, 16 

Does destroy is validity 20—25 

Romish libeity, . 32,33 

Sla very, 

Not in the Bible 38—43 

In the Cons itution, 103—107 

Sophistrv exposed 73 

Twen'y-five propositions, 114 — 119 

Westminster Confession, 

Its statements, 78 

Its doctrine that of all I lie reformers, . 48 

Heresy, what it is, 61, 62 

Twentieth chapter, 79 

Twenty-third chapter, 82 

Thirty-first chapter, 84 

When responsible for others' actions,. .20, 23 



ERRATA. 

Page 3, line fifteen from bottom for " person " r< al p runs. 
Page 44, line twenty-two from tcp, for " objection " re<id objections. 



JAN -0 I9W 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: April 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



